Introduction

The vicissitudes of professional communication epistemology lends the class well to postmodern theory in that teaching paradigms differ, but the preconceptions of what its goals claim to do are the same. If the ultimate goal of professional communication courses is to prepare students to communicate technical information effectively with target audiences, all the while considering rhetorical issues like context, available means of communication, and the audience itself, then the means for arriving at this end are vast in number. Granted, most teachers are likely to have a syllabus unique to their own class and individual needs, but the theoretical framework of professional communication courses generally fall into a few categories. Professional communication instructors tend to include (in whole or in part): critical thinking, formalism, service learning, and civic rhetoric, and they may choose to be more humanistic than empirical/scientific in focus.

With this fragmentation of the field, in terms of a clear and overarching theoretical framework, comes the difficulty of articulating the ideals of professional communication. If the goal of professional communication is universally the same (and it would have to be in order to have some level of consistency in the academy), then the question arises if there would have to be an ideal path to obtain these ends. It may be too much to expect students to balance understanding theory and rhetoric, learning forms and ethics, and engaging with client based projects in one semester with aspirations that each area will receive the proper attention it deserves. This predicament could open the door to multiple sections of professional communication being open, conceivably with one dedicated to foundational theory and critical analysis and another focusing further on critical theory, genres, and multiple community service projects. Instructors can address ethical issues in the workplace in both of these potential courses. Requiring non-English majors to take more than one advanced composition and communication course would be difficult if they do not receive clear explanation about how each builds upon the other. Simply articulating the importance of professional communication courses and how their goals are met would bolster the inherent necessity of each course, which is obvious to those in the department.

In order to provide a clear explanation of professional communication, it would help to create a precise definition of the field and what it entails, which is difficult considering the vastness of professional communication as a whole. However, creating a set definition of the field and requiring classes to narrowly accept it may not be the best route considering the many strengths of the field. Therefore, using a single course to integrate non-English majors into the field is a daunting task. The very scope of the field and its complex pedagogy makes it a postmodern construct, for there is of yet no one agreed upon method for instruction, and the literature and research in the field is very diverse. Perhaps the only way of reconciling the differences in the field is to have a single, requisite communication course operate as a pastiche of all the various elements of professional communication. This may be a common means of instruction, with select readings explaining different aspects, but only experience can determine if this is the ideal pedagogy. Displaying the field as a postmodern construct may efficiently show its diversity, but it will not necessarily inspire students if there is not a sense of completion that a definitive course would offer, so a course should take its strengths from various theories and combine them into a complete pedagogy.

Professional Communication as a Postmodern Construct

Professional communication is a postmodern construct in that the field typically divides between those advocating formalism and the plain style and those pushing for rhetoric and invention to be at the forefront. Still, professional communication pedagogy is not limited to theses two extremes, for camps will fall anywhere in between the two groupings of rhetoric and formalism (and this is simplistically assuming that these are the only extremes). With the very field of professional communication so theoretically scattered, the very epistemology of a single professional communication course tends to be a pastiche of theory, form, ethics, rhetoric, and a practical application for it all.

A professional communication course could opt to isolate each are into 1-2 week sections, but it is necessary to show how they all interrelate. Profession communication could be modeled after “systems thinking,” which “is defined by Reich as learning to see the world not as discretely compartmentalized units but more as a web of interrelated and overlapping elements (230), a concept that easily relates to postmodern theory” (Wilson 87-8). The various parts of professional communication can be woven together. In addition to the course behaving as a postmodern construct, professional communication students essentially become postmodernists because they develop a pastiche, a compilation of various guidelines, conventions, strategies, etc. and re-contextualize them for whatever specific work environment they enter into.

Rhetoric and Humanism

Businesses will have unique methods for communication, so teaching rhetoric, in addition to form and genre, would be ideal. This is not to say that readings of Aristotle should trump Carolyn R. Miller, Walter J. Ong, or any others in typical course reading lists. Humanism in professional communication entails understanding the author and audience relationship, and it brings invention back to the forefront rather than conformity to a strict ideal of form and style (Miller 614-15). Rhetoric in professional communication requires a great degree of accountability on the part of a communicator, for he or she will have to consider carefully the mode of communication, the context, and the audience.

According to Melinda Kreth, Carolyn R. Miller, and Janice Redish, Patrick Moore, for one, considers rhetoric solely as “overt persuasion,” and “he wants to limit instrumental discourse to that which guides, controls, and/or limits the ways people interpret texts” (Kreth, Miller, and Redish 478). This definition of rhetoric and professional communication shows professional discourse as directional, controlling, or even manipulative. Moore believes professional communication can be vitally important for the proper utilization of a product, so it does not have to have a negative connotation. Creating an instruction manual potentially with multiple interpretations is not helpful when their needs to be a clear way for the reader to interact with the product (Moore 111). Aside from persuasion, rhetoric in professional communication also entails understanding context, audience, the available means for communication, and an understanding of convention and why it is useful. Rhetoric isn’t just persuasion, but it is also an understanding a situation that requires communication on many levels.

Margaret Baker Graham discusses how persuasive writing is very much a necessity for those in the business world. Memos can be used to “persuade the reader to agree with the writer that certain nonroutine business...should be interpreted or acted upon in a certain way” (Graham 239). There is a potential for rhetoric, as a tool of persuasion, to be utilized in professional communication. Graham gives strategies for politeness when writing memos, and she discusses how the business culture and setting can influence these strategies (241-2, 247). Instilling a sense of decorum in communication is arguably as important as addressing ethical issues in the workplace.

Critical theory (i.e. rhetoric as reflection, not just persuasion) “seeks to expose and perhaps subvert the hidden ideologies behind technical communication” (Kreth, Miller, and Redish 478). Rhetoric is important in professional communication because it shatters an illusion that professional discourse always lives up to its ideal and seeks exploration of the situation at hand and how various forces (from the business, to the writers, and to the audience) affect discourse. If professional communication classes are to adequately integrate critical theory, they must explore “the interactions between participants, discourse, and contexts” (Wilson 95).

Rhetoric requires understanding the rules of convention and when it is appropriate, but it also means knowing when to use alternatives. “Addressing multiple readers lessens the likelihood that writers will vary strategies according to their social relationship with readers; however...individual past experiences may affect how readers interpret a specific communication” (Graham 240). Understanding audience experience in a communication process means communicators should know forms that users will expect in certain contexts, so formalism is useful to negotiate audience experience and how one can potentially deviate without confusing an audience that has certain expectations.

Formalism and Critical Thinking

The assumption that instrumental discourse is inherently objective and solely instructive (i.e. purely of noble intent) is debatable. If one includes postmodern theory in professional communication, then one will consider the tone of instrumental discourse as being objective only an author’s construct that seeks to transcend his or her perception, which is subjective. This discourse works in claiming objectivity because the majority of readers will either agree with the document blindly or agree based on similarities in experience. The sense of objectivity also comes from the use of the plain style, which only records that which is essential to the conveyance of meaning, so communication stays focused. It is the case that “Older technical communication texts also reinforce the idea that technical communication involves simply looking at something and capturing its exact truth in clear words” (Wilson 76). This further demonstrates the idea that instrumental discourse is merely a documentation of scientific truth and is therefore outside of rhetoric, an idea that may not be entirely true.

In addition, some people tend to accept a text when it comes pre-formatted in a style familiar to them. People may have expectations of a how a document should be presented, so learning what the conventions are for different instances of communication may help ease persuasion, for the audience will analyze the content more rather than heavily scrutinize the production of the content (sense the presentation is something they have experience with already).

According to Melinda Kreth, “Writers and readers often fail to realize that the language of instrumental discourse does not in fact correspond to some external, objective reality but that it is sometimes necessary to write and read as if it does” (479). Instrumental discourse may appear to be “useful and humane,” but “we should encourage our students to question it: Whose interests does such discourse serve?” (480). Furthermore, “the decisions they make when producing various forms of instrumental discourse are essentially rhetorical decisions, however narrowly defined” (480). With this being the case, some instructors want to “ignore instrumental discourse because they feel it is inherently coercive and oppressive.” Instead, “teach students how to question and subvert such norms” (Kreth, Miller, and Redish 480). In other words, students should question formalism and the shroud of objectivity that may blind incautious readers. Still, students first need to be acquainted with instrumental discourse, learning how it is produced and the benefits of using it (or at least some reasons for why it is predominant in society) before they can truly appreciate reconfiguring a system. Students should learn the norms in genre, tone, language, etc. and the potential usefulness of these conventions before they are taught to see the flaws in the norms.

In addition to teaching students critical analysis, instructors should also alert students to “the risks involved in subverting conventions when working within powerful bureaucratic organizations,” and they should help students realize the situatedness of the discourse conventions in their fields as well as the ideological assumptions behind those conventions”(Kreth, Miller, and Redish 481). Still, Wilson argues that “changing the way students perceive their relationship to authority structures, technology, and information itself is the greatest positive impact we can have on their lives” (97). Therefore, the discipline seeks to show the role of professional communicators in the hierarchy of a business, and how they can affect the structure of communication processes in a business.

It would help to instruct on interdisciplinary communication and power relationships within an organization. “In training technical communicators, we not only teach when to use bulleted lists and how to analyze audiences, write concise sentences, and apply rhetorical techniques, but we also shape how these future employees perceive their relationship to their employers, to technology, and to the economy” (Wilson 73). Be able to articulate the importance of your job in the workforce (Wilson 84). If students are to enter into a business in a service project, they should feel secure with what skills they have to offer and not feel a conflict between their training and the work assigned to them from a business.

Service and Ethics

When considering service learning as a viable pedagogy for professional communication, it is important to consider whether suppressing the academy for the workplace truly is meeting the needs of students. It is vital that students get an understanding that communication practices vary between organizations: “An endless number of organizational cultures exist, a reality that greatly complicates business communication pedagogy. Still, offering students the opportunity to manipulate linguistic strategies to meet organizational conventions may be one way to meet the challenge of exploring the relationship between language and context” (Graham 244-5). Giving students the opportunity to work with actual companies can illustrate this dynamic through first-hand experience in dealing with the difficulties of communicating with employers and colleagues who have varying levels of expertise. Furthermore, employees may be over-extended themselves, so students will have to develop time (and stress) management skills. Most importantly, service learning ties the academy with the workplace, and it can stimulate a sense of civic duty in students.

Michelle F. Eble and Lynée Lewis Gaillet advocate raising an awareness of civic responsibility in student, and they discuss how various Scottish rhetoricians connected academia, ethics, and society. They state, “To prepare students to be both effective writers and engaged citizens, many scholars and teachers now advocate that we design courses that engage with local communities by relying on service-learning and activist research pedagogies” (Eble and Gaillet 341). Eighteenth century courses in Scottish Universities under professors like George Jardine put emphasis in moral philosophy: “The Scottish educational system of the eighteenth century emphasized that universities and colleges prepare students for citizenship” (Eble and Gaillet 348).

While service learning gives students experience working as professional communicators, this practice does not necessarily give students the same advantages they could get from classroom instruction. When discussing ethics, it is important to note that Scottish instructors did not necessarily dictate what was right or wrong for given situations. Currently, “Professional and technical communication programs that emphasize rhetoric and ethical inquiry inherent in writing projects continue a tradition begun by moral philosophy professors of the eighteenth century who neither engaged in didactic teaching of right and wrong nor dictated to students what they should think in given situations” (Eble and Gaillet 349). Contemporary professionally communication classes also do not claim to have absolute knowledge of what counts as right and wrong.

A survey of technical communicators conducted by Sam Dragga showed that even professionals do not agree about what is ethical and why. By encouraging the seeking and weighing of multiple voices, critical thinking encourages students to consider what they, not their instructors or society, think is ethical. As David Russell notes, ‘No person or profession has absolute knowledge of the public good-an ethical calculus-although some act as if they did’ (92). (Kienzler 323)

The important idea behind integrating ethical discussions into technical communication is that students will at least begin to consider the larger context of their work, like who does their work affects, why they are communicating in such a manner, and who benefits from their work (the company, society, or both).

The underlying theme in many professional communication courses seem to be that students are being prepared for the workforce, so instructors should not only make students effective communicators, but they should also teach students to be diligent in making ethical decisions. The goal then is to make good communicators and honorable citizens. Professional communication studies should be of a benefit to the business world, and it should be a benefit to society as a whole. Greg Wilson asks, “Does using industry as a model and bending communication theories and pedagogies to fit the needs of industry put our loyalties too much on the side of industry?” (78). Professional communication instructors should question whether they are only serving to meet one of these ends: furthering the workforce, academy, or both equally.

Eble and Gaillet point to how Thomas Miller made connections between professional communication and civic rhetoric through service learning. According to Miller, “we cannot be both technicians of the word and humanists because there is a basic contradiction between teaching writing as a technique of information processing and teaching writing as the negotiation of shared values and knowledge” (qtd. in Eble and Gaillet 342). Thomas Miller seems to argue that formalism and humanism are pedagogical opposites, with formalism focusing on conformity to a style and humanism focusing on adaptation to meet the needs of a community. While this distinction is fair, it may not be completely desirable to separate the two and only teach one exclusively in the classroom.

Making Students Adaptable

Ultimately, students should develop a sense of civic responsibility so that they will behave in a way that is honorable in society rather than act unethically though it may benefit a business. Students should also learn the common modes of communication yet be able to adapt them in order to communicate effectively for various audiences and with their peers. In addition, students must learn how to work in groups with people of different specializations: “Today, most companies flatter organizational hierarchies and rely on multi-disciplinary teams to accomplish tasks” (Wilson 96). Learning how to adapt in order to communicate with peers in different departments is important, but so is having commonalities between members. Using genres consistently and knowing which to use for specific situations could actually help the communication process, so instructors should not discard formalism in professional communication studies. Genres common to business writing may or may not be best suited for various occasions, but some business will still consider typical genre usage to be in good form for the business. Learning how genres are typically used is not counterproductive, even if it only serves as an example for how writing may appear in a business. Knowing the standard uses of a genre may aid in communication between departments and individuals when they all have a formal system and expectations of what to expect from content in a specific genre.

Jim Porter argues that ethics and rhetoric go together because writing seeks to benefit something or someone. Furthermore, “he defines rhetorical ethics as ‘a set of implicit understandings between writer and audience about their relationship’” (qtd. in Eble and Gaillet 349). Eble and Gaillet state that “service-learning, ethics, and civic rhetoric” should be the foundation of any service course, and community involvement should be promoted in programs with this interest (351).

Adjusting the Resistant Reader

Although professional communication pedagogy may be scattered between camps, the end goal is usually to prepare undergraduate students for entry into the workforce. With division within professional communication, both in pedagogical practices and in the theoretical framework of the field, it may be difficult to impress the necessity of advanced composition courses upon students outside of the discipline. When the field is divided into so many camps, students taking a professional communication course could get entirely different experiences from different instructors (which is likely the case for courses in other disciplines, but the contrast in this field can be particularly sharp). Furthermore, a feeling of doubt may arise when a student realizes much of their time is spent reading articles or focusing on theory instead of learning grammar and genre writing strategies (that is, if their particular instructor takes a more liberal approach to the class).

Instructors may claim there is no one mode, genre, software, etc. that they can teach that will represent every business, so they teach students theoretical constructs and, hopefully, temper theory with somewhat authentic exercises. Integrating a service learning approach is desirable, for many students may not immediately see a semblance between academia and the workplace. Instructors must make connections between the theoretical concepts practiced in the classroom and the business world, but there is no one way to do it.

Theory and Practice

The relationship between what is learned in the academy and what how it is applicable in the business world may need to be addressed for undergraduates, for they may want to take a more hands on approach in their education. It is important that students get practice for the concepts they learn in class. According to Greg Wilson, Students need to become more comfortable with nebulous assignments, to look for multiple good answers in a churning sea of possible, yet contingent, answers. The workplace (even more so the postmodern workplace) does not come in a neat package like some assignments or end-of chapter exercises…Workers never make decisions with perfect information. Assignments with fewer instructor-stipulated parameters can help simulate this condition by encouraging students to find alternative rules and appropriate responses. (Wilson 87)

If the goal of a student is to enter into the business world, then instructors should give exercises that simulate the workplace is desirable, whether they are projects with actual clients or not. Service learning is ideal in that students will be engaging in a close to authentic work experience, but the instructor can also give exercises with tight rules and stringent parameters so that students will have to apply many of the theories (critical theory, adaptation of a form, etc.) they learned throughout the semester. This may be necessary for clients may not always provide a challenging project for students.

Ann M. Blakeslee notes that students should be integrated into a community if they are to learn the organization’s genres and work effectively with the group (170). Furthermore, students may wish a feeling of authenticity in the work they accomplish (Blakeslee 171). Student perception of the school work is important, and though class work may not be authentic, it at least exposes students to “the social realities of the workplace” (177). Also, though a student may not perceive a particular activity as being representative of the business world, that does not mean he or she will not exert an effort and get anything out of the work. Students should see classroom exercises as an opportunity to see how various theories they have learned can be applied.

Conclusion: Modernism From a Postmodern Construct?

The expectations of students should be acknowledged by instructors, for many students have “cultural and technological expectations” when taking professional communication, which tends to be a modernist conception of the course (Wilson 80). Donna Kienzler noted that students in a critical thinking class tended to consider their values (be they self-centered or community-oriented) when working. Students also began to consider other viewpoints, question the perspective of the dominant culture, and “they did engage in ethical dialogues” (Kienzler 335).

Not everyone will agree with the notion that instructors should teach professional communication as a postmodern construct. According to Greg Wilson, “Postmodern technical communication pedagogy may seem a multifaceted oxymoron: designing a structure to teach a structureless approach to the structured description of structured systems” (72). Nevertheless, Wilson still finds faults in a modernist approach to professional communication. He argues modernism maintains rigidity in a linear narrative, definitions/classifications, and in how language documents technical information, i.e. truth (Wilson 74).

Kelli Cargile Cook offers a very good representation of professional communication as a postmodern construct. She believes a course should incorporate basic (including formalism and correctness), rhetorical (audience and purpose), social (workplace, collaboration), technological, ethical, and critical (“the ability to recognize and consider ideological stances and power structures and the willingness to take action to assist those in need”) literacy into professional communication (7-17). However, she does not believe a single course can teach students all they need to know about each:

No one, however, should expect a single course (or even a single curriculum) to conclude with all students knowing everything about a subject or using all of its knowledge strategically. These six literacies may not, in fact, be achievable without consistent and repeated exposure to them all. For this reason, considering a program of study in terms of the six literacies may be just as important as considering their existence in individual activities or courses. (Cook 24)

Ideally, students should take multiple communication courses, but asking non-English majors to do so may meet resistance. Therefore, teaching a single professional communication course as a postmodern construct will at least introduce students to many of the considerations they will have to consider in order to communicate effectively when they become professionals. If a single course is to be an effective representation of the discipline it should hope to include rhetoric, critical thinking, formalism, service learning, and civic rhetoric to, depending on how effectively so much can be managed within a semester. Students can then decide for themselves if they will take more classes for further experience and insight into professional communication practices.

Works Cited

Blakeslee, Ann M. “Bridging the Workplace and the Academy: Teaching Professional Genres through Classroom-Workplace Collaborations.” Technical Communication Quarterly. 10.2 (2001): 169-192.

Cook, Kelli Cargile. “Layered Literacies: A Theoretical Frame for Technical Communication Pedagogy.” Technical Communication Quarterly. 11.1 (2002): 5-29.

Eble, Michelle F. and Lynée Lewis Gaillet. “Educating ‘Community Intellectuals’: Rhetoric, Moral Philosophy, and Civic Engagement.” Technical Communication Quarterly. 13.3 (2004): 341-354.

Graham, Margaret Baker. “Administrative Writing: Bringing Context to Pedagogy.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication. Thousand Oaks: Apr 1998. 12.2 (1998): 238-252.

Kienzler, Donna. “Ethics, Critical Thinking, and Professional Communication Pedagogy.” Technical Communication Quarterly. 10.3 (2001): 319-339.

Kreth, Melinda, Carolyn R. Miller, and Janice Redish. “Comments on ‘Instrumental Discourse is as Humanistic as Rhetoric.’” Journal of Business and Technical Communication. 10.4 (1996): 476-482.

Miller, Carolyn R. “A Humanistic Rationale for Technical Writing.” College English. 40.6 (1979). 610-617.

Moore, Patrick. “Instrumental Discourse is as Humanistic as Rhetoric.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication. (1996). 100-117.

Wilson, Greg. “Technical Communication and Late Capitalism: Considering a Postmodern Technical Communication Pedagogy.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication. 15.1 (2001): 72-99.