Ethics in Technical Writing
ENC 5937
Paul
M. Dombrowski, Associate Professor Office: HFA 417G
E-mail:
pdombrow@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu
Phone: (407) 823-2279
Hours: Wed. 6-8, Thurs.2-5
Andrei Sakharov
Russian H-bomb scientist turned anti-weapons activist,
Nobel Prize in Peace, 1975
Because the role of the modern technical writer and
communicator is expanding rapidly and will continue to do so, the ethical scope
of the technical writer's responsibility is comparably expanded too. The technical writer is now seen as an
information developer in the formative stages of creating technical
information, as a communicator in disseminating information, as an interpreter
in explaining information, and as a usability expert in guiding the application
of information. As a result, ethics
becomes in involved in technical writing in many ways both traditional and new,
obvious and non-obvious.
In this course we will study the role of ethics in
technical writing and communication at various levels. Ethics is the study of what is right and
good, whether as abstract theories or as concrete actions, usually involving
deciding a course of action in a dilemma offering several possibilities. Ethics here is understood broadly as encompassing
both conventional theories of ethics and values and value systems.
The course provides a mix of history and theory with
real and hypothetical applications. Our
classes will begin with a discussion of the assigned readings to explicate and
clarify them, to draw connections with other readings and discussions, and to
highlight key points. We will also
discuss applications both within the readings and from our own real or
potential experience. We will strive to
understand the complexity and diversity of possible opinion on these theories
and applications, though also affirm the need to come to definite decisions
personally in real situations. It is
hoped that these discussions will allow each of us to clarify his or her own
thinking and ethical judgment, to gain greater confidence in the how and why of
judging ethical dilemmas, and to articulate our judgments more
effectively.
There are several basic assumptions we will be
operating from throughout this course.
While you might disagree with some of these assumptions, they will
nevertheless be assumed in the course.
1.
Ethics
cannot be taught in the sense of making one ethical, but it can be talked about
in a way that foster taking ethical responsibility.
2.
We
personally can gain insights into ethical responsibility from thinkers of the
past and thinkers of the present such as fellow class-members. Open discussion with others helps us to see
the complexity of ethical issues and helps to clarify our own judgments.
3.
Ethics
can be both an individual and a social matter, and these two bases can
sometimes clash.
4.
In
a sense we are all individual authorities on ethics, and collectively too. Differences of opinion, values, and judgment
will be respected.
5.
Ethics
is different from the law yet related to it, so our primary focus will not be
on the law.
6.
Ethical
judgment is innately difficult and problematic.
Much of what we will talk about has to do with
writing and words but also with oral and visual communication. We will also see that Porter and others
construe “writing” to include all sorts of electronic, digital, and networked
discourse. We will see too that many of the ethical issues of
traditional technical writing apply also to networked discourse, though
internetworking also has its own unique, unprecedented ethical issues.
Dombrowski,
Paul M. Ethics in Technical
Communication. Needham Hts., MA: Allyn & Bacon, 2000.
Porter,
James E. Rhetorical Ethics and
Internetworked Writing. Greenwich, CT: Ablex, 1998.
A
collection of reading materials on reserve at the UCF library, and occasional
handouts.
·
Two
examinations, both take-home, at mid-term and end-of-term (20% each).
·
A
written and oral presentation of a real or hypothetical ethical case (paper of
medium length) (15 %).
·
A
written and oral presentation on approved topic, readings and critical
exploration (paper of medium length).
Include supporting material from at least three Internet sites (15%).
·
A
short paper on your personal observation of or experience with e-mail or other
internetworking activities explaining how they are different from other media,
what values are at work, what ethical dilemmas are raised, and how they might
be dealt with (10%).
·
Identify
and discuss four Internet sites that you especially appreciate and found useful
to this course (other than those cited in the two textbooks, but may include
CPSR) (5%).
·
Regular
participation in class or small group discussions showing familiarity with the
readings, sensitivity to differing viewpoints and values, and thoughtful
consideration of the topic at hand (15%).
Paper
topics can be on any area that interests you and is relevant to this
course. You might wish to delve into
theories, whether historic or contemporary, or you might to focus on particular
real instances or concrete applications.
This list suggests the range of possible topics:
·
Postmodernism
and its critique and rejection of conventional theory is a hot topic, so you
might read about Foucault and what others have said about his works in relation
to technical writing.
·
Explore
the view that capitalism, free enterprise, and high-tech industrialism are
value systems that obscure or deny that they are value systems, and that these
values systems need to be critiqued and corrected (David and Graham would be a
good starting point).
·
Feminism
and its critiques of the values embodied in technical discourse, so you might
read works by Sauer, Lay, Allen, Brasseur (Lay would make a good starting
point).
·
Contemporary
forms of historical theories such as Habermas, Rawls, or
neo-Aristotelians.
·
Compare,
contrast, and critique codes of ethics relating to technical discourse.
·
Compare
and contrast older views of ethics in technical discourse with contemporary
ones in technical communication journals.
·
Explore
the position that ethics has nothing to do with discourse about science or
technology because they deal with what is unquestionably true and certain. Or explore the opposite view, that science
and technology are value-laden and represent value systems (Lessl and Sullivan
would be good starting points).
·
Explore
ethics in medical discourse, branching from several articles discussed in class
and incorporating questions about objectivizing the medical subject.
·
Summarize
the discussions on several major newsgroups or listservs about ethics in
scientific or technical communication or in networked discourse.
·
Present
a detailed ethical analysis from several theoretical perspectives of the Web
sites of major organizations dealing with technology, science, nuclear energy,
defense, the environment, or similar matters.
·
Summarize
and compare several ethical theories or perspectives out of the secular,
Euro-American mainstream such as theological ones (e.g., Christian stewardship)
or those associated with particular cultures (e.g., Confucianism) or ideologies
(e.g, Marxist).
·
Compare
and contrast several Internet sites having to do with applied or professional
ethics in a technical or scientific field.
·
Compare
and contrast in detail and relate to the readings and discussions in this
course several Internet sites having to do with ethics and electronic, digital,
or internetworked discourse. This might
include codes of ethics. Nuances would
be crucial here.
·
Explore,
analyze, and appraise claims about the similarities and differences between
print and internetworked forms of discourse.
In
your paper and oral presentation, you will need to make explicit, clear, and
prominent the connection to the course, our readings, and class
discussion. Be sure to ask me for
approval of your topic to ensure its suitability.
Week
1 Introduction to
Ethics in Technical Communication
Defining
what the course is and is not and how we will proceed
Discuss
productions and topics
Week
2 Dombrowski:
Relation between Ethics and
Communication and Rhetoric
Dombrowski:
“Can Ethics Be Technologized?”
Lessl, “The
Priestly Voice”
Week
3 History and
Theory of Ethics:
Aristotle,
Virtue
Kant,
Deontological
Utilitarian-Consequentialist
Feminist
and Caring
Markel, “Ethics and Tech.
Comm.: Foundational”
Clark, “Ethics in Tech.
Comm. and Rhetoric”
Week
4 Nazi
"Medical" Science - Origins of Information
Katz, “Ethic
of Expediency”
Debakey,
“Happiness is Only a Pill Away”
Week
5 Challenger -
Meaning of Information
Example of
Feynman’s Special Report for Roger’s Commission
Sauer, “Sense and
Sensibility”
Ethics of Care
Stone, “In Search of Patient
Agency”
Week
6 Star Wars -
Unrealistic Claims
Examples of Parnas and
Boycott Pledge
Williams,
“Intel’s Pentium Chip”
Allen, “Ethics and Visual
Rhetoric”
Week
7 Tobacco - Quibble
on Words
Suppression and Control of
Information
Orbell, “DoD Tailhook
Report”
Codes of Ethics
Web sites of several codes
Bucholz, “Deciphering Codes
of Ethics”
Sturges, “Overcoming the
Ethical Dilemma”
Week
8 Oral and Written
Presentations on Real or Hypothetical Cases
Week
9 Mid-term
Examination, take-home
Week
10 Porter: Ethics in
Internetworked Writing Classrooms
and Communities
Ethics for Rhetoric and
Writing:
Classical and Modern View
Faber,
“Intuitive Ethics”
Markel, “An Ethical
Imperative for Tech. Comm.”
Wicclair and Farkas,
“Ethical Reasoning in Tech. Comm.”
Week
12 Postmodern Views
Ding, “Marxism, Ideology,
Power”
Moore, “Ethical Discourse
and Foucault”
Waddell, “Environmental
Communication”
Week
13 Legal and Ethical
Issues in Cyberspace
Dennett,
“Bias in Clip Art”
Mann,
“Achieving Excellence: Cost to Health”
Propose and
Discuss Internet Project
Dragga, “Is
This Ethical?”
Week
14 Web Work
Submit short
paper on e-mail or other internet experience
Report on
Web sites most helpful to you
Week
15 Exercise of
Critical Rhetorical Ethics
Postmodern Commitment and
Solidarity
Dragga,
“Ethical Intercultural Communication”
Bryan, “Seven
Types of Distortion”
Week
16 Oral and Written
Presentations on Internet Projects
Course
Evaluations
Course
Review
Final Examination, take-home
Sources
Technical Communication
Quarterly
IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Technical Communication
College Composition and Communication
College English
Journal of Advanced Composition
Association of Teachers of Technical Writing (ATTW), Code of Ethics at
http://english.ttu.edu/attwtest/ATTWcode.asp
Society for Technical Communication (STC), Ethical Principles for Technical Communicators at
http://216.35.212.183/code.html
American Medical Writers Association (AMWA), Code of Ethics at
www.amwa.org/about/ethics/html
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), maintains Risk Forum (similar to CPSR’s Risk Digest), Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct is interesting for its great depth and complexity in a highly technical engineering context, at
www.acm.org/constitution/code.html
Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineering (IEEE), Professional Communication Society does not as yet have a code of ethics, but the parent organization does have a Code of Ethics at
www.ieee/org/about/whatis/code.html
Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, includes Risks Digest for posting reports on problems involving computers, and sources for ethics on the Internet (mostly re computers) at:
www.cpsr.org/program/ethics/ethlink.htm
Articles
Allen,
Nancy. “Ethics and Visual Rhetorics: Seeing’s Not Believing Anymore.” TCQ 5/1 (Winter 1996): 87-105.
Bryan,
John. “Seven Types of Distortion: A Taxonomy of Manipulative Techniques Used in
Charts and Graphs.” JTWC, 25/2 (1995): 127-179.
Bucholz,
W. J. “Deciphering Professional Codes of Ethics.” IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 32/3 (1989): 62-68.
Clark,
Gregory. “Ethics in Technical Communication: A Rhetorical Perspective.” IEEE Transactions on Professional
Communication 30/3 (1987): 190-195.
David,
Carol and Margaret Baker Graham. “Conflicting Values.” JBTC 11/1 (January 1997): 21-49.
Debakey,
Lois. “Happiness is Only a Pill Away: Madison Avenue Rhetoric Without Reason.” JTWC 10/1 (1980): 25-37.
Dennet,
Joann Temple. “Addressing Bias in Clip Art Provided with Popular Software.” IEEE Transactions on Professional
Communication 41/4 (December 1998): 270-273.
Ding,
Dan. “Marxism, Ideology, Power and Scientific and Technical Writing.” JTWC 28/2 (1998): 133-161.
Dombrowski,
Paul M. “Can Ethics Be Technologized? Lessons from Challenger, Philosophy, and
Rhetoric.” IEEE Transactions on
Professional Communication 38/3 (September 1995): 146-150.
Dragga,
Sam. “Ethical Intercultural Communication.” TCQ
8/4 (Fall 1999): 365-382.
Dragga,
Sam. “Is This Ethical? A Survey of Opinion on Principles and Practices of
Document Design.: TC 43 (1996):
255-265.
Faber,
Brenton. “Intuitive Ethics.” TCQ 8/2 (Spring 1999): 189-202.
Katz,
Steven B. “The Ethic of Expediency: Classical Rhetoric, Technology, and the
Holocaust.” College English 54/3
(1992): 255-275.
Lay,
Mary M. “The Value of Gender Studies to Professional Communication Research.” JBTC 8/1 (January 1994): 58-91.
Lessl,
Thomas M. “The Priestly Voice.” Quarterly
Journal of Speech 75 (1989): 183-197.
Mann,
Sandi. “Achieving Frontline Communication Excellence: The Potential Cost to
Health.” IEEE Transactions on
Professional Communication 41/4 (December 1998): 254-269.
Markel,
Mike. “An Ethical Imperative for Technical Communication.” IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 36/2 (June 1993):
81-86.
Markel,
Mike. “Ethics and Technical Communication: A Case for Foundational Approaches.”
IEEE Transactions on Professional
Communication 40/4 (1997): 284-289.
Moore,
Mary. “Ethical Discourse and Foucault’s Conception of Ethics.” Human Studies 10 (1987): 81-95.
Orbell,
Brenda. “The DoD Tailhook Report: Unanswered Questions.” JTWC 25/2 (1995): 201-213.
Sauer,
Beverly. “Sense and Sensibility in Technical Communication: How Feminist
Interpretation Strategies Can Save Lives in the Nation’s Mines.” JBTC 7 (1993): 63-83.
Stone,
M. B. “In Search of Patient Agency in the Rhetoric of Diabetes Care.” TCQ 6/2 (Spring 1997): 201-217.
Sturges,
David L. “Overcoming the Ethical Dilemma: Communication Decisions in the Ethic
Ecosystem.” IEEE Transactions on
Professional Communication 35/1 (March 1992): 44-50.
Sullivan,
Dale L. “The Epideictic Rhetoric of Science.” JBTC 5/3 (July 1991): 229-245.
Waddell,
Craig. “Defining Sustainable Development: A Case Study in Environmental
Communication.” TCQ 4/2 (Spring
1995): 201-216.
Wicclair,
Mark R. and David K. Farkas. “Ethical Reasoning in Technical Communication.” Technical Communication (2nd
Qtr. 1984): 15-19.
Williams,
C. “Intel’s Pentium Chip Crisis: An Ethical Analysis.” IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 40/1 (March 1997):
13-19.
Zerbe,
Michael J. et al. “The Rhetoric of
Fraud in Breast Cancer Trials: Manifestations in Medical Journals and the Mass
Media—and Missed Opportunities.” JTWC
28/1 (1998): 39-61.