UWP 104A 002: Writing in the Professions--Business and Technical
Professor Chris Thaiss
cjthaiss@ucdavis.edu
Homepage: writingprogram.ucdavis.edu/thaiss
University Writing Program Website: writing.ucdavis.edu
Office: 171 Voorhies Hall
Office Hours: MW 9-10 AM and by appt.
Course Location: 247 Olson Hall
Course Hours: MW 10:30-11:50 AM
UWP 104A (Writing in the Professions: Business and Technical) is meant to provide guided, evaluated practice in several forms of written communication commonly performed by business, science, and technical professionals as they go about their varied lives as researchers, employees/managers, and contributing members of the community. Business and government managers always rank writing at or near the top of abilities needed for successful performance. See, for example, the recent report of the National Commission on Writing. Forms of business and technical writing that we will practice in this course include, among others,
*proposals (often written to non-specialists)
*research and technical reports for fellow specialists
*instructions and other explanations for non-specialists
*memos and letters
As customary in business and the technical workplace, the writing in this course will be highly collaborative. Its effectiveness depends on both individual energy and cooperation. In these sections, the collaborative writing will be carried out by such means as
*electronic mail and real-time discussion/response (via SmartSite wiki)
*planning, preparation, and revision of a report of a small-group field research project and of an oral/visual presentation based on that research
*small-group "feedback" on drafted writings
*dialogue with the instructor in class, in office hours, and via email and SmartSite wiki.
I trust that each person in the course will emerge from it with a better-developed sense of the principles and typical methods of business and technical writing, plus improved ability to carry out typical tasks in these varied careers.
EVALUATION STANDARDS
Evaluation will be ongoing in this course, primarily in the form of responses by the instructor and fellow students to ideas and documents in various stages of completion. Three projects (the comparative document/article/news analysis, the set of instructions, and the field research report) will be drafted, workshopped, and revised. Grades will be A through F, although under University policy some students may qualify to have this course graded Pass/No Pass.
Grading standards are as follows (grades to be determined at the discretion of the instructor):
A = outstanding work: among the specific virtues, full, active, cooperative, and imaginative participation in all activities, exercises, and projects of the course; prose that consistently demonstrates the principles of effective business/technical writing, as outlined in the core texts;
B = very good work: full, active, and cooperative participation in all activities, exercises and projects; prose that almost always demonstrates the principles of effective business/technical writing;
C = satisfactory work: full, cooperative participation in all activities, exercises, and projects; prose that, with revision, almost always demonstrates the principles of effective business/technical writing;
D = almost satisfactory work: almost full, usually cooperative participation in all activities, exercises, and projects: prose that, with revision, usually demonstrates the principles of effective business/technical writing;
F = unsatisfactory work: inconsistent participation in activities, exercises, and projects; or prose that, with revision, still fails to demonstrate consistent application of the principles of effective business/technical writing.
I will give plusses and minuses according to UC Davis/UWP policy.
NOTE: A written project will receive no credit if a student does not participate in every phase of the development of the project and meet all deadlines for preliminary materials.
If a final draft, plus required addenda, is not submitted at the beginning of class on the date due, it will be considered late and will lose one letter grade for each day or part of a day past due.
Books, Materials, and Other Resources
Required Books:
John Brereton and Margaret Mansfield (2000), Writing on the Job, Updated Edition; New York: Norton (WOJ)
There will be incidental expenses for photocopying of drafts and other documents as part of class projects.
Please become familiar with the University Library's databases in business and technical fields. We will consult
some of these for the Comparative Analysis project.
For additional help with your writing, especially commentary on drafts, I encourage your consulting the
tutorial services of the Learning Skills Center.
Schedule of Classes
M Jan 7 Introductions and Exercises: Learning SmartSite
W Jan 9 The "Technical Pet Peeves" exercise; the Process and Principles of Business/Technical Writing; **begin group formation and proposal-writing for team field research; reading due: WOJ, Introduction.
M Jan 14 Composing and Revising Effective Business Prose (memo and letter exercises); post proposal for team field research; reading due: WOJ, Chapters 1, 6b.
W Jan 16 Effective Editing of Business and Technical Prose: reading due: WOJ Chs. 10 and 11.
M Jan 21 Martin Luther King, Jr., Day
W Jan 23 Teams begin to compose detailed interview questionnaire to conduct fieldwork: reading due WOJ, Chapter 3a, to begin prep for research interviews. POST revised research proposal.
M Jan 28 Small-group workshop: compose and post letter of introduction/commitment to company. Teams continue composing interview questionnaires and then will POST questionnaires to SmartSite groups.
W Jan 30 Begin discussion of "Comparative Document/News/Periodical Analysis" assignment and do exercises in class. **Choose three pieces for Comparative Document/News/Periodical Analysis and send to me via email (no later than Friday, Feb. 1) the title, source, date, and length information about each selection, plus a one-sentence description of how each source is relevant to this assignment. Once I give you email approval of the 3 selections, begin drafting the comparative analysis.
M Feb 4 Continue discussion of Document Analysis criteria (exercise);Bring three pieces for CDA to class. **continue drafting Comparative Document Analysis
W Feb 6 Principles of the "Set of Instructions" exercises; after our discussion of examples, submit proposal paragraphs and begin drafting.
M Feb 11 Small-group workshop on drafts of Comparative Document Analysis; discussion of research progress; **revise and edit comparative analyses;
W Feb 13 Revised drafts of Comparative Analyses (plus addenda) due in class;Writing Technical Instructions (con'd): drafting workshop on first draft of set and explanation. (See "How to Write Instructions" on the TechScribe site.) **Between this and next class, conduct field test of instruction set and draft revision.
Also: Team Project: Reports of interview results and research progress; bring organization documents to class for review.
M Feb 18 Presidents Day
W Feb 20 Small-group workshop on drafts of revised instruction sets and explanations
M Feb 25 Final instruction sets (plus revision, explanation, and change memo) due in class; in-class Critique Workshop--Evaluating Web Pages Pertinent to Team Field Research
W Feb 27 Workshop on Web Page Evaluation II--draft and post web critiques by end of class
M Mar 3 Drafting, organizing, and formatting team field research reports; begin team conferences wth instructor
W Mar 5 Continue team conferences with instructor on team field research
M Mar 10 Cross-group workshop on drafts of field research environment-and-interview reports; **revise and edit reports.
W Mar 12 Cross-group workshop on drafts of field research document-analysis reports; workshop on ten-fifteen minute oral presentations of team field research;
M Mar 17 Revised drafts of both parts of Team Field Research reports, plus addenda, due in class; course evaluations; prep for presentations; reading due: TBA.
F Mar 21 Exam 8-10 AM Twelve-fifteen-minute oral presentations by research teams; hand in presentation outlines.
Assignments
1. In-Class Exercises, Workshops, Discussions (30%)--Because business and technical writing, including the writing in this course, is collaborative, your full, active, cooperative participation in the daily work of the course is key to your success. 30% of course credit (roughly 1.5% of final grade for each day's in-class performance). Satisfactory completion of impromptu and assigned in-class writing exercises, full participation in peer-review workshops on works in progress, and active participation in oral discusssions of reading assignments and lectures are credited in this daily grade. I will rate your daily participation and performance either satisfactory (full, active participation during the entire class period, as described under Evaluation Standards on the Syllabus) or less than satisfactory. In-class work by its nature may not be made up later.
*Any absence--for whatever reason--will mean that you cannot earn this daily 1.5% toward the final grade.
*Lateness to class will mean that you can't earn more than 1% credit for that day. Remember: credit can only be earned for work performed.
********************
2. Comparative Document/Article/News Analysis (20%)--We will work on comparative analysis of three documents on the same issue, phenomenon, or event from business/technical-related publications.
My aim in this assignment is to increase your attentiveness to both the overt and the subtle differences among documents concerning the "same" event, issue, or phenomenon, as produced in different writing situations. Whether as producer or consumer, you need to be aware of these differences in building your own informed perspectives on the issues, as well as in creating documents for different types of readers.
Your audience for the analysis will be the other members of the class and me; that is, we are interested readers, but we probably don't know too much about the issue or event you choose to analyze, so your summary and analysis will give us new knowledge.
One of the three documents you choose must be an article from a national general interest online news source (such as http://www.washingtonpost.com) or from a print general news publication, such as the San Francisco Chronicle or Newsweek. I must approve your source.
The second of these documents must be from a special-interest website or print publication; for example, a technical report written for scholars or an overtly political analysis for a political action group. We will practice in class using databases that index print and electronic materials on business and technical topics. I must approve your source.
The third of these documents must be an article on the topic in a print periodical such as Fortune, Forbes, or The Economist (business) or Wired, Scientific American, or Popular Mechanics (technical fields). The audience for such publications tends to be well-educated, but not necessarily specialized in a field. Again, I must approve your source.
We will develop in class questions to ask about the three documents by which to do a well-informed comparison. Among the areas of comparison will be purposes, intended audiences, kinds of evidence, organization, writing style and tone, and graphic presentation.
Format: Your completed analysis will consist of three main sections:
A. Summary of the Issue/Event/Phenomenon--In 500 well-chosen words, you will summarize the content of the issue/event for class members, using the three documents as your sources. Since the documents will more than likely agree on many of the details, summarizing should not be difficult. However, where the documents differ on basic information, you'll need accurately to state these differences in your summary.
B. Assessment of the Important Differences among the Documents--In 1000 well-chosen words, you will characterize each of the three pieces in turn in regard to each analytical category. For each category, you need to highlight differences among the three pieces.
C. Judgment of Strengths and Weaknesses--What is the greatest strength of each document? What might be improved? In 600 well-chosen words (roughly 200 for each document), describe the standout strength and weakness of each piece. Which of the three articles does the best job of achievieng its purposes for its intended readers? Why?
Procedure: Drafts and revised drafts should be submitted using the above format and should be roughly 2000 words. Revised drafts must be accompanied by
- first drafts (with annotations by peer reviewers),
- filled-in critique sheets from peer reviewers,
- a one-page "change" memo that describes and justifies the changes in the revised draft, and
- an Appendix that includes photocopies of the compared documents.
Documentation style. I recommend American Psychological Assocation (APA) style or Council of Sciences Editors (CSE) style, though other styles will be fine--as long as you apply that style consistently. This style should be used both for "in-text" citations and for your list of sources at the end of the report.
*********************
3. Set of Instructions (10%)--You may choose any type of instruction or area of endeavor for this assignment that you wish (e.g., a cooking recipe for a special family dish, instructions for assembling a piece of furniture, a procedure for your job, game directions, etc.). Your goal here is to write a coherent set of instructions so that another person can follow them successfully.
The report of this assignment will consist of two parts:
(1) the instructions themselves (no more than 500 words per draft plus any appropriate illustrations), both in a first draft and in a revised version after field testing (see below); feel free to format your instructions in whatever way (e.g., visually, aurally) will best help your audience to follow them successfully.
(2) a concise explanation (no more tban 500 words) of how you designed the instruction set to meet the needs of a specific user, whom you will describe in this explanation in terms of ability to follow these instructions. Cover your choices of level of detail, language, and graphic presentation in explaining how you adapted design to audience. Be sure to cover also how you field tested the set and how it led you to revise the set.
Field test and revision: After you have created a first draft of these instructions, you will field test the instructions by having another person attempt to follow them. Based on the field test, you will revise the instructions.
As described above, the first part of your report will include both the first draft and revision of the instructions. Also as described above, the second part of your report will include a brief description of the field test and of how and why you revised the set.
********************
4. Team Field Research Project (30%)--Throughout the course, we will be developing aspects of a three-person project that will be based on your investigation of the documents and writing practices of a local business, government, or academic organization that produces technical and/or commercial documents. You and your teammates will choose the organization, with my approval. In class, we will discuss methods, materials, and presentation of the projects. Chapters of WOJ will be assigned and adapted. Aspects of the project include the project research proposal, a letter of introduction to the organization, a series of progress memos sent electronically, a critique (by each member of the team) of a website pertinent to the organization being studied, and the full report of the research.
A separate assignment (10%) will be a 10-15 minute oral/visual presentation by each group to the class (in the designated final exam period).
A third part of the assignment, but not graded separately, will be done online in class: an evaluation of a web page either produced by the organization or closely related to a primary kind of work done by the organization. Criteria and methods of the website critique will be explained in class.
Format: The research report itself will consist of two main parts: (1) an analysis of five or more typical, significant documents written by members of the organization (1-2 double-spaced pages per document analyzed), analyzed for those features learned and applied in the Comparative Document/News Analysis assignment, and (2) a detailed interview (minimum of 5 double-spaced pages) with a key member or members of the organization (e.g., owner/manager, project manager, principal investigator, lead faculty) knowledgeable about the range and types of writing done by the organization as part of its work. A concise yet vivid description of the physical environment of the research site (with illustration(s) as appropriate) will accompany the transcript.
Appearance of Final Report: A positive visual impression means that the reader is more likely to read a business report. Looking good won't hide poor writing and thinking--but looking sloppy or "thrown together" often means that even the best writing and thinking will be ignored. I won't dictate appearance--surprise me and your classmates in a good way, impressing us with your creativity and style, even as you earn our respect for the quality and organization of your writing.
Evaluation Criteria
My criteria for evaluating the written projects are based on the principles of effective business writing detailed in the pertinent chapters of WOJ and in our class discussions. In addition, I will grade on the appearance of the final report, as described above, and on how well each team member meets deadlines and cooperates in the team venture.
Procedure: Due dates are noted in the schedule below. Remember that credit for the entire project is contingent on full, active, and cooperative participation in all phases.
These projects will receive a group grade; thus, the grade earned by the team will be the grade earned by each individual on the team. Nevertheless, one element of the final report will be the team's self-assessment of each person's contribution, and I will take the liberty of adjusting individual credit, if necessary.Team members who contribute little (this happens rarely, but it does happen) will receive significantly less credit.
Audience: The other members of the class and I will be your readers. We are interested in your findings, but you and your teammates will be the experts on the environment you study. So our knowledge depends on your detailed, vivid, accurate portrait of the writing culture of the organization.
************************
5. Oral/Visual Presentation of Team Field Research (10%)--For the final exam, each team will prepare a 15-minute presentation that highlights and summarizes the field research project.
Goal: To convey to the class strongly and professionally the distinctive character of the organization, its main purposes and audiences, and how those are achieved through communication tools, attitudes, and practices. How do members of the organization use communication tools and techniques efficiently, imaginatively, and perhaps surprisingly to achieve these purposes for these varied audiences, both internal and external? Conversely, what communication problems or challenges do they face and how would your team suggest they deal with them?
Media for Presentation: All the technical resources of the Olson computer lab plus any other performance media you can import.
Content resources: Documents, interview(s), photos, etc., from your visit(s) to the workplace.
Criteria:
1. Each member of the team should contribute equally to the success of the presentation. Each should speak roughly equally. Each should strive to follow the "tips" we will have discussed.
2. All parts of the goal described above need to be achieved and each of the key questions answered, using appropriately selected items from the content resources.
3. Visually and aurally, the presentation should support and make emphatic and memorable the points your team is making about the organization. Use of technology should be appropriate to the persuasive task and not just used for its own sake. (Remember, flashy is not always effective.) Nevertheless, I’ll be looking for some appropriate use of the varied tools of the lab and other performance tools you think will help achieve your goal.
******************************
Word Requirement in UWP Courses
All UWP courses require a minimum of 6000 words of original graded writing. To pass the course, students must hand in every graded writing assignment, including the final exam. In this course, the word counts I list in relation to individual assignments are a rough guide for you to use in planning the scope of your reports and other documents. Because conciseness--making every word count--is an essential goal of business and technical writing, the number of actual words you use is less important than the effectiveness of your communication.
Therefore, if you can get your message across to key readers in fewer words than what I list, fine. If a complex message requires more words than what I suggest, fine, too. I won't base credit in this course on achieving a certain number of words, but on the effectiveness of the words and graphics you use.
Home