High Tech—Soft Touch: Bringing Communication to Technical Classes
Abstract
Students in the information technology field are inundated with the need to learn a wide variety of technical skills in an ever–changing environment. While strong technical knowledge is critical to a successful information technology career, it is simply not enough. The ability to communicate technical information effectively often determines a person’s professional success because even the greatest ideas will fail if no one understands them. Over the course of the last seven years, I have used several different techniques to incorporate communication assignments into my introduction to computer concepts and programming course with varied and sometimes unexpected results. I will present these efforts and my students’ responses to specific assignments.
Background
When I began my professional career as a computer engineer, I never imagined that more than half of my time would be spent writing status reports and users’ guides, teaching training courses, and making formal presentations to upper–level management. I had expected to devote nearly all of my time designing and implementing engineering projects and very little time on communication activities. My experience is not unique; the importance of communication skills in the workplace surprises many technical professionals (Reynolds, 1995; Sadler, 1995). When I began my teaching career, I decided that I would incorporate communication assignments to prepare my students for their professional careers. I expected my students to transfer their knowledge of writing and public speaking to my courses just as I expected them to also transfer their knowledge of mathematics to my courses. I soon discovered that many of my students had difficulty with technical communication assignments because they did not think that communication was an important topic in a technical course. With this realization, I began my journey on the soft side and, as Gruber et al. state, “at the very least, I wanted to introduce the idea that their writing careers did not end when they completed their English composition courses.”
Progression of Assignments
My first approach was to create a very traditional academic writing assignment for which students chose a technical topic in computing and prepared a research paper complete with a bibliography and citations. My students understood that when they “write for a professor, they can assume that the professor knows more about their subject than they do, and that the professor expects them to show how much they know about the subject” (Samson, 1995). Although this assignment helped my students gain technical knowledge, I found it very difficult to evaluate their papers since they were full of incomplete sentences, grammatical mistakes, and incorrectly cited (or more commonly, not cited at all) references. In later semesters, I added examples of reference citations to the assignment, and I explained the most common grammatical errors. Although students’ papers did have fewer errors, I was still dissatisfied with the assignment because both the students and I found the assignment to be tedious and unconnected to the other course material.
I then decided to add an opinion paper to my list of writing requirements, hoping to spark students’ interest in the topic. I asked students to choose a topic related to the impact of technology on society and give a brief explanation of the topic as well as their opinion on their chosen issue. My intent was to have students write papers in which they passionately argued a point. Instead, I received opinion papers that were essentially research papers with a one–line opinion, such as “I think Internet banking is a good idea.” The students had reverted to a style with which they were familiar: the traditional research paper paradigm. At first, I did not understand why my students had not written papers the way that I wanted. After discussing my dilemma with one of my colleagues, he asked me a simple question, “Did you tell them that’s what you wanted?” I then realized that I had not clearly defined the requirements. I would never write vague instructions for a programming assignment. Why did I think that I should write my communication assignments differently? I modified the instructions so that the students had the clearly identifiable goal of trying to convince me that their opinion was correct by writing as if they were having an argument with me. By contextualizing the assignment, I noted that the quality of my students’ papers increased dramatically. Not only did I receive papers that were passionate and interesting but also the sources that the students chose were more relevant, and there were fewer grammatical errors.
In my programming courses, I have included situated–learning exercises (Gruber et al., 1999; Artemeva, Logie, and St.–Martin, 1999; Dias, Freedman, Medway, and Pare, 1999) in the form of technical writing assignments that are more representative of the type of writing required in the workplace. Technical writing typically focuses on a very specific purpose for an audience that has less knowledge than the author (Samson, 1995; Pfeiffer, 2001). Although many of my students will take a technical writing course later in their academic careers, my goal is to integrate technical writing as a natural part of a programming course. I want them to understand, or at least begin to understand that technical writing is not simply an activity that they must perform in one specific course but is a skill that will be expected of them throughout their careers. In one assignment, I asked my students to prepare a status report on their current programming project for their immediate supervisor. In another assignment, students must create step–by–step directions of how to use a feature of the programming language or environment. In general, my students’ initial efforts at technical writing were unsuccessful. Their status reports often contained unnecessary detail, and their step– by–step directions were very difficult to follow. I then realized that I had not written the instructions for the assignments for the correct audience. Most of my students had no prior experience writing status reports or creating step–by–step directions. I had written the instructions from my perspective and not from a student’s perspective. I already knew how to develop these types of documents, but my students did not. Consequently, I now provide my students with a sample document. As a result, their technical writing skills have greatly improved. Additionally, in their final programming project, I ask my students to incorporate the new programming concept for which they have written the step–by–step directions. Not only have my students’ communication skills improved, but they are also able to create more complex programming projects.
In their professional careers, many of my students will be asked to show the intended users how to use a program or a piece of equipment. In order to provide my students with an opportunity to practice their oral communication skills, I have also incorporated a brief presentation in which students demonstrate their final programming project to the class. At this point in the course, this presentation is a more realistic project because the student has transitioned into the expert, and the audience, including the professor, knows less about the project than the student. Students were very uncomfortable during this demonstration because they did not fully understand what was expected of them. I had written the assignment directions for someone who develops and presents demonstrations daily. In other words, I had written the directions for me and not for my students. I now provide a sample presentation so that my students have a better understanding of what is required.
At the beginning of my introduction to computer concepts and programming course, I now briefly introduce the concept of personality types based on the work by Myers–Briggs (Myers and McCaulley, 1989; Keirsey and Bates, 1984). All students then complete a questionnaire to determine their Myers–Briggs personality type. In the associated writing assignment, I ask them to comment on the accuracy of their personality description, describe potential benefits or challenges of working with my personality type, and tell me whether they think that knowing another person’s personality type would be beneficial. Additionally, I ask them to describe their ideal university so that they can reflect on how their personality type affects their choices. The papers that I receive for this assignment are generally well–written and interesting with significantly fewer grammatical errors than traditional research papers. When I asked my students why the personality papers were better, they identified three main reasons: they were familiar and comfortable with the topic; they were interested in the topic; and they enjoyed the assignment.
Throughout the semester, we revisit the importance of personality types on group dynamics and also how personality types can affect the development of presentations, documents, and projects. I also use the information from my students’ personality types to broaden my teaching techniques and customize my interaction with students. For instance, if a student is an extreme introvert, then I will use the more informal in– class exercise time to interact with that student individually to provide further instruction.
Outcome
As I refine my communication assignments, I continue to see an improvement in my students’ writing and speaking skills. Since I have begun to give specific goals and examples, my students’ papers and presentations contain fewer grammatical errors, are more focused on the relevant concepts, and are more interesting to read. The attitude of my students towards these communication activities has also improved. The moans, groans, and rolling of eyes that I received when I assigned research papers have been replaced with students thanking me for assigning the personality type paper.
One unexpected outcome of my efforts to improve my students’ exposure to communication is that my own communication skills have improved. I am more aware of the intended audience when I create assignment instructions, presentations, and papers. When I can, I avoid writing in the formal, passive–voice style of traditional technical research papers that had become my habitual writing style. One of my colleagues in the communication department commented to me that she could tell when something is written in passive voice because she wants to fall asleep when she reads it. Consequently, I now use the first person, active voice whenever I can so that my audience has a reason to remain engaged.
Conclusion
I have shifted from merely incorporating communication assignments into the curriculum to interweaving communication throughout my courses. By doing so, communication has become a more natural part of the fabric of the course. Rather than relegating communication to its own isolated unit, I now try to foster communication during the entire semester. My students’ communication efforts continue to improve as I create assignments that have more clearly defined requirements, are relevant to technical careers, and are targeted to my student audience.
References
Artemeva, N., Logie, S., St.–Martin, J. (1999). “From Page to Stage: How Theories of Genre and Situated Learning Help Introduce Engineering Students to Discipline–Specific Communication.” Technical Communication Quarterly, 8 (3), 301–316.
Beaufort, A. (1999). Writing in the Real World: Making the Transition From School to Work. New York: Teachers College Press.
Gruber, S., Larson, D., Scott, D., and Neville, M. (1999). “Writing Practice in Engineering Courses: Implementation and Assessment Approaches.” Technical Communication Quarterly, 8 (4), 419–440.
Dias, P., Freedman, A., Medway, P., and Pare, A. (1999). Worlds Apart: Acting and Writing in Academic and Workplace Contexts. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Keirsey, D. and Bates, M. (1984). Please Understand Me: Character and Temperament Types (5th ed). Del Mar, CA: Prometheus Nemesis.
Myers, I. B. and McCaulley, M. H. (1989). Manual: A Guide to Development and Use of the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Pfeiffer, W. S. (2001). Pocket Guide to Technical Writing (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Reynolds, J. F. (1995). “What Adult Work–World Writers Have Taught Me About Adult Work–World Writing.” Professional Writing in Context: Lessons From Teaching and Consulting in Worlds of Work. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sadler, L. V. (1995). “Preparing for the White Rabbit and Taking It on the Neck: Tales of the Workplace and Writingplace.” Professional Writing in Context: Lessons From Teaching and Consulting in Worlds of Work. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Samson, D. C., Jr. (1995). “Writing in High Tech Firms.” Professional Writing in Context: Lessons From Teaching and Consulting in Worlds of Work. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Biography
Lizz Howard is an assistant professor in the Computer and Information Technology Department at Miami University—Middletown, where she teaches programming, data structures, and computer architecture. She is especially interested in integrating interdisciplinary components into her technical classes. Before coming to Miami University—Middletown, Howard spent a decade working as a test and measurement design engineer. When not prepping for classes, she, along with her husband, loves to design and build garden structures for her 4,000 square foot garden. She can be reached at howardev@muohio.edu.