Newsletter of the Canadian Association for the Study of Language and Learning

Volume 24, Number 1, Spring 2007

Natasha Artemeva

Carleton University

Becoming an Engineering Communicator:
A Study of Novices' Trajectories in Learning Genres of their Profession

The study presented in this dissertation started in 1997 when, in response to the requirements of industry and engineering regulatory bodies, I was hired to design and teach an engineering communication course (ECC). Originally, the study was designed as a pedagogical assessment of the effectiveness of the course. Later, when I started my doctoral program at McGill University, it grew into a theoretical study of novices' trajectories in learning genres of engineering communication. My role as a researcher changed from a teacher-researcher involved in a pedagogical assessment of a course design to a researcher seeking answers to theoretically driven questions about genre learning.
This summary briefly reviews the origins of my doctoral study, research questions, its theoretical framework, methodology, pedagogy of the engineering communication course, main results, conclusions, and directions for future research.

My research was prompted by the then-recent studies into the university-to-workplace transition. The authors of these studies observed that communication that the students experience at university and in the workplace are often “worlds apart” (Dias, Freedman, Medway, & Paré, 1999). They also concluded that a traditional classroom-based professional communication education often fails to prepare students for the world of work (e.g., Freedman & Adam, 2000; Freedman, Adam & Smart, 1994) and raised a question of portability of rhetorical strategies from one context to another. In an attempt to refine the current understanding of how novices learn genres of their profession (in my case, engineering), I sought answers to the following questions:

I. What does it mean to master domain-specific genres (in particular, the genres of engineering), where "domain" includes both academic and workplace genres
This question consists of two sub-questions:

• What does the domain-specific rhetorical genre knowledge include?
• Where and how do novices accumulate the constituents of rhetorical knowledge of domain-specific engineering genres and how do these constituents allow novices to communicate successfully within the engineering profession?

II. Is it possible to teach domain-specific communication strategies apart from the local contexts in which they occur?
In order to find answers to these questions, I used a theoretical perspective based on a combination of

• Rhetorical Genre Studies (RGS) (following the work of Bakhtin, 1986; Freedman & Medway, 1994a, b; Miller, 1984; Schryer, 1993, 1994, 2000), where RGS considers genre as social action (Miller, 1984)
• Activity Theory (based on the work of Engeström, 1987, 1999; Leont'ev, 1981, 1989; Vygotsky, 1978), and
• the situated learning perspective (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998).

In addition, in my analysis of novices' learning trajectories, I used the concept of kairos as the right timing and proportion (Artemeva, 2005; Kinneavy, 1986, 2002; Miller, 1992, 2002). As well, Bourdieu's social theory of practice (1972) provided me with the notions of agency as human capacity for freedom of action and social capital (in particular, cultural capital as a form of culturally authorized values) (Bourdieu, 1986).

RGS provided the primary theoretical framework allowing me to focus on participants' trajectories in learning engineering genres. Particularly important for my study is the view of genre as stabilized only for now (Schryer, 1993), allowing for change, and forming the rhetor's behavior. In my study I adopted Schryer's (2000) definition of genre as a constellation "of regulated, improvisational strategies triggered by the interaction between individual socialization . . . and an organization” (p. 450).
Activity Theory provided a view of human activity as mediated through the mediational means (Engeström, 1987; Leont'ev, 1981). AT is masterful in the social domain; however, it is not as effective at the individual level. On the other hand, Legitimate Peripheral Participation (LPP), a situated analytical perspective on learning in communities of practice (COP) (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998), directed my attention to local situations and individual participants. The combination of AT and the situated learning perspective with RGS allowed me to analyze both social and individual aspects of genre learning within activity systems and communities of practice.

The engineering communication course I designed and taught provided the starting point for my doctoral study. The design of that course was based on RGS and situated learning perspective. In the ECC design (Artemeva, Logie, & St. Martin, 1999) I attempted to establish an engineering context that would allow students immersed in it to

a) experience genres of engineering communication as an integral part of any project rather than learn about genres and
b) be introduced to the idea of their flexibility that depends on the requirements of a particular situation.

The main part of the course is a continuous project based on a topic from an engineering course(s) a student is taking concurrently with the ECC. This set-up allows students to experience the communication course as situated within the engineering curriculum, facilitating learning in their engineering courses. All course assignments and feedback received from peers and the instructor form an engineering project genre system (Bazerman, 1994). Every assignment (a project document) is based on and connected to the previous assignment. The project gradually unfolds over the term. Students have to adapt the genres they are learning in the ECC for the purposes of their projects, thus experiencing the need to use genres to provide an appropriate response to a particular situation. They experience genres as "regulated, improvisational strategies" (Schryer, 2000), hence, developing an initial rhetorical flexibility. The accuracy of the engineering content is particularly important for the communication course, as it seems futile to separate rhetorical expertise from domain content expertise (cf. Geisler, 1994).

In this study, all participants took the ECC in 1997-1999. I used a purposive sample (cf. Miles & Huberman, 1994; Patton, 1990) of ten volunteers from the 1997-1998 and 1998-1999 cohorts. At the same time, the research sample in the study is one of convenience and is self-selective. The study has an emergent design: at the beginning (1997-1999) it was designed as an assessment of the pedagogical approach used in the ECC and then gradually developed into a qualitative, longitudinal exploration of former ECC students' trajectories in learning engineering communication strategies. The design of the study is based on Charmaz's (2000) version of grounded theory, i.e., theory building from the data, and includes case studies. The case study approach used in this project allowed for "progressive focusing" (Stake, 1995, p. 8); that is, it allowed me to reconsider and develop research questions through data collection and analysis.

I collected data from a group of study participants over the span of eight years (1997-2005), while engaging in a concurrent and recursive data analysis. The study has a multicase, multimethod design. In addition, it uses multiple sources of the data: in-class questionnaires; ECC electronic newsgroup postings; electronic asynchronous interviews (or "electronic questionnaires"); e-mail messages; audiotaped interviews and their transcripts; and interview field notes.  I used the constant comparative method for categorization (coding) (e.g., Miles & Huberman, 1994) and complemented categorizing strategies with the analysis of the context, or connecting strategies (case studies) (e.g., Charmaz, 2000, 2002, Maxwell & Miller, 1992, 2002).  In other words, I used multiple ways of triangulation:

• Data triangulation, provided by the use of multiple study participants and a variety of data sources in a study;
• Theory triangulation, achieved through a combination of multiple theoretical perspectives used to interpret data complemented with the theory building from the data;
• Methodological triangulation, achieved through the combination of categorizing (i.e., coding) and connecting strategies (i.e., case studies and narrative summaries) (Maxwell & Miller, 1992, 2002).

I also employed member checks to ensure that study participants have an opportunity to verify my conclusions based on the data collected from them (e.g., Stake, 1995, 2000; Winsor, 1996). All ten participants provided me with member checks. The use of various triangulation strategies and the multicase design has allowed me to verify the interpretation of the data presented in this dissertation, and thus, to validate the study.

For the purposes of my study, I decided to adapt the form of representation known as Individual Case Synopsis (ICS) (Fischer & Wertz, 1979) to present an individual participant's learning trajectory in his/her learning of engineering communication strategies, with a focus on change through time. Four out of ten participants supplied me with a particularly complete body of data (over 50 sources of data): Bill, Moe, Rebecca, and Sami. These participants' stories are presented in the four Individual Case Synopses. For the remaining six study participants, a summative Overall Summary of Experience was written.

Below I briefly present summaries of the ICSs for four study participants, Bill, Sami, Rebecca, and Moe.

Bill's and Sami's fathers are engineers. Bill and Sami grew up in the atmosphere of what Lave & Wenger (1991) call "war stories," i.e., oldtimers' stories about the practices of the engineering profession. Bill and Sami had various engineering related experiences through the years before and at the University and had an opportunity to be surrounded by mentors who helped them enter engineering Communities of Practice. Shortly after graduating, both Sami and Bill were able not only to join engineering companies and work productively, but also to change communication practices of their companies. The new practices they introduced were recognized as acceptable and approved by oldtimers in their COPs. Both Sami and Bill referred to the ECC and other engineering related experiences as a source of their understanding of how genres work. In other words, their relevant cultural capital, ECC, workplace experiences, understanding of engineering genres as allowing for flexibility, and ability to seize and create a kairotic moment and act proportionally allowed them to enact genres in such a way that they, though changed, remained recognizable. Both Sami and Bill were successful in introducing changed genres in their respective workplaces.

Initially, Rebecca lacked knowledge and understanding of what the engineering profession entailed. Her mastery of engineering genres occurred later than in Sami's and Bill's cases and was based on her academic experiences in engineering classes, the ECC, and workplace experiences in various workplaces where she worked throughout the years of her academic studies. By the time she graduated from the university, she was also able to develop her own communication strategies that helped her integrate into an engineering community of practice. The fact that she lacked relevant cultural capital made her learning of engineering genres and developing her own rhetorical strategies slower than in Bill's and Sami's cases, however, she was able to learn from the ECC and academic and workplace environment and use what she learned in her workplace to develop successful rhetorical strategies.

Moe enrolled into the engineering program expecting to be able to make money after the graduation. He didn't know much about the profession when he started his studies and was soon discouraged. In Moe's case, learning of relevant genres does not seem to have occurred to the same extent as in Sami's, Bill's, and Rebecca's cases. He later developed an ambition to become an entrepreneur rather than an engineer. However, he wasn't successful in his initiatives to secure funding for his enterprises because his sensitivity to the genre of the grant proposal had not developed even after several attempts to apply.  He repeatedly missed kairotic moments (deadlines for grant application submissions). His story allows one to speculate that his difficulties in learning and using appropriate communication strategies may be caused by his lack of relevant cultural capital, understanding of the flexibility of genres, and his markedly different private intention (cf. Miller, 1984); that is, his goal was to make money rather than to become a professional engineer.

In summary, the use of a combined RGS-AT-situated learning theoretical perspective in my attempt to locate answers to the questions about teaching and mastery of domain-specific genres allowed me to uncover a longitudinal process of genre learning by the participants that occurred in different social settings. I observed that genre knowledge in those novices who had exhibited the ability to use engineering genres successfully (and even changed some workplace genres) was a result of a summative effect of various genre knowledge "ingredients" accumulated from different sources at different time periods. The various sources of such genre knowledge ingredients included, but were not limited to, classroom and workplace practices. The accumulation of genre knowledge ingredients did not necessarily happen in a smooth, uninterrupted way with a clear beginning and a clear end.
The interpretation of the data suggests that, in addition to the knowledge of genre conventions and understanding of audience's expectations, the following components have a critical influence on the formation of genre knowledge:

(a) cultural capital,
(b) domain content expertise,
(c) the novice's understanding of the improvisational qualities of genre,
(d) agency, as reflected in the novice's ability to both seize and create kairotic moments in the chronological flux of time, act proportionally, and enact genres in the ways that are recognizable by the community of practice,
(e) formal education,
(f) workplace experiences, and
(g) private intention.

All these ingredients of genre knowledge allow novices to understand the intricacies of domain-specific genres. As Bazerman (1997) pointed out, once rhetors understand "the dynamics of a genre," they have a range of rhetorical choices, “including choices that are far from traditional in appearance, but which nonetheless speak to the circumstances. . . . The pressure of genre is not of conformity so much as of response to complexity [italics added]” (p. 23). This research further urges us to revisit our understanding of what it means to successfully master the genres of a profession and what it means to teach these genres.

Sami’s, Bill's, and Rebecca's cases provide evidence that the engineering communication course, designed on the premises of RGS, supplied them with a foundation in professional generic practices that the students were able to draw and build on throughout their subsequent academic and professional experiences. It is notable that, contrary to the findings of the recent studies on the university-to-workplace transition (e.g., Dias, Freedman, Medway, & Paré, 1999; Freedman & Adam, 2000; Freedman, Adam & Smart, 1994), neither Bill nor Sami or Rebecca had difficulties drawing on genres learned in one context when applying them in another.

The findings of this study suggest that some ingredients of genre knowledge can, in fact, be taught in a classroom context like the one provided in the ECC; however, for the genre knowledge to become active and for the individual to be able to apply this knowledge successfully, it needs to be complemented with other genre knowledge ingredients accumulated elsewhere. In other words, this finding again raises a question of the portability of rhetorical strategies across contexts, but from a different perspective. It appears that rhetorical strategies may be portable but only if a novice already possesses a combination of particular genre knowledge ingredients. This question requires further research.

The study suggests that communication instructors need to extend their pedagogies beyond teaching genre conventions and audience awareness and provide classroom contexts that would allow students to experience genres in a situated learning environment and develop the understanding of genre as allowing for flexibility and educated intervention. The findings of the study indicate that a combination of Rhetorical Genre Studies with complementary theories provides researchers with a powerful tool for the analysis of genre learning in various contexts (Freedman, 2003a, 2003b).

A question for further research is how domain-specific genre learning by students can be assessed. As the results of my study suggest, such an assessment becomes possible only years after the students have been introduced to the conventions of a genre.  The longitudinal research model may indicate directions for the development of a "delayed" assessment. Opportunities for the design and administration of such delayed assessment need to be explored in the future.

References

Artemeva, N. (2005). A time to speak, a time to act: A rhetorical genre analysis of the   calculated risk-taking by a novice engineer. Journal of Business and Technical   Communication 19(4), 389-421.

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.

Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). The problem of speech genres. In C. Emerson & M. Holquist (Eds.), V. W. McGee (Trans.), Speech genres and other late essays (pp. 60-102). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

Bazerman, C. (1994). Systems of genres and the enactment of social intentions. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Genre and the new rhetoric (pp.79-101). London: Taylor & Francis.

Bazerman, C. (1997). The life of genres, the life in the classroom. In W. Bishop & H. Ostrom (Eds.), Genre and writing: issues, arguments, alternatives (pp. 19-26). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.

Bourdieu, P. (1972). Outline of a theory of practice (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge:     Cambridge University Press.

Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.). Handbook of theory and research of the sociology of education. (pp. 241-258). New York: Greenwood Press.

Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 509-535). 2d edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Charmaz, K. (2002). Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. In J. F. Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of interview research: Context and Method (pp. 675-693). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Dias, P., Freedman, A., Medway, P. & Paré, A. (1999). Worlds apart: Acting and writing in academic and workplace contexts. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta-Konsultit Oy.

Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on Activity Theory (pp. 19-38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fischer, C. T. & Wertz, F. J. (1979). Empirical phenomenological analyses of being criminally victimized. In A. Giorgi & D. Smith (Eds.), Duquesne studies in phenomenological psychology: Vol. 3 (pp. 135-153). Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.

Freedman, A. (2003a). Interactions between theory and research:  RGS and a study of students and professionals working "in computers." Carleton Papers in Applied Language Studies, XX, 40-53.

Freedman, A. (2003b). Pushing the envelope: Expanding the model of RGS theory. Carleton Papers in Applied Language Studies, XX, 54-69.

Freedman, A. & Adam, C. (2000). Write where you are: Situating learning to write in university and workplace settings. In P. Dias & A. Paré (Eds.), Transitions: Writing in academic and workplace settings (pp. 31-60). Cresskills, NJ: Hampton.

Freedman, A., Adam, C., & Smart, G. (1994). Wearing suits to class: Simulating genres and simulations as genre.  Written Communication, 11(2), 193-226.

Freedman, A., & Medway, P. (Eds.). (1994a). Genre and the new rhetoric. London: Taylor & Francis.

Freedman, A., & Medway, P. (Eds.). (1994c). Learning and teaching genre. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.

Geisler, C. (1994). Academic literacy and the nature of expertise: Reading, writing, and knowing in academic philosophy. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.

Kinneavy, J. L. (1986). Kairos: A neglected concept in classical rhetoric. In J. Dietz Moss (Ed.), Rhetoric and Praxis: the contribution of classical rhetoric to practical reasoning (pp. 79-105). Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.

Kinneavy, J. L. (2002). Kairos in classical and modern rhetorical theory. In P. Sipiora & J. S. Baumlin (Eds.). Rhetoric and Kairos: Essays in history, theory and praxis. (pp. 58-76). New York, NY: State University of New York Press.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Leont’ev, A. N. (1981). The problem of activity in psychology. In J. V. Wertsch, (Ed.). The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 37-71). Armonk, NY: Sharpe.

Leont’ev, A. N. (1989). The problem of activity in the history of Soviet Psychology. Soviet Psychology, 27(1), 22-39.

Maxwell, J. A. & Miller, B. A. (1992). Two aspects of thought and two components of qualitative data analysis. Unpublished manuscript. Harvard Graduate School of Education.

Maxwell, J. A. & Miller, B. A. (2002). Categorizing and connecting as components of qualitative data analysis. Unpublished manuscript. George Mason University.

Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis. (2d ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Miller, C. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70, 151-167.

Miller, C. (1992). Kairos in the rhetoric of science. In S. P. Witte, N. Nakadate, & R. D. Cherry (Eds.). A rhetoric of doing: Essays on written discourse in honor of James L. Kinneavy. (pp. 310-327). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Miller, C. (2002). Foreword. In P. Sipiora & J. S. Baumlin (Eds.). Rhetoric and Kairos: Essays in history, theory and praxis (pp. xi-xiii). New York: State University of New York Press.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Schryer, C. (1993). Records as genre. Written Communication, 10(2), 200-234.

Schryer, C. F. (1994). The lab vs. the clinic: Sites of competing genres. In A. Freedman, & P. Medway (Eds.), Genre and the new rhetoric (pp. 105-124). London: Taylor & Fancis.

Schryer, C. F. (2000). Walking a fine line: Writing negative letters in an insurance company. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 14(4), 445-497.

Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Stake, R. E. (2000). Case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln, (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2d ed., pp. 435-454). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Winsor, D. (1996). Writing like an engineer: A rhetorical education. Mahwah, NJ: LEA.