discussion topics (notes)

1.) Why did Selzer want to study how an engineer writes?

He wanted to study how an engineer writes because they use technical terms that are specific to only their profession and no other. Engineers are pretty much in a world of their own and in laymans terms, if an ordinary person walked into a room full of engineers talking about some project they were working on, they probably wouldn't know what was going on. Also, engineers aren't known for their writing skills. They are more 'science-y' people, and therefore less likely to be a good writer-also not exactly known for their "people skills" for the most part-it's all technical "jargon" with no fluff. "Within the limitations of the workplace".

learn how engineers do the writing they do. (plan, arrange, write, and revise)
not what do they write, but how.

**RESEARCH QUESTION**

2.) What did you find interesting, unique, surprising about his answer to this question (about how an engineer planned, arranged, drafted, and revised the text)? Also, how did he convince you he was correct/on target (that it was true)?

I was surprised that he used a pen and paper (not Word). I didn't find anything interesting, unique, or surprising about his answer. I would assume that technical writers in the '80's did not really write very well, as they had probably not been prepared for writing in the workplace in their scientific environment (Dr. Gouge). Stylistic choices when considering audience are not much of a concern, because because he is more worried about the content or meat of his message.

Aristotle: Rhetoric is "the art of observing, in any given situations, the available means of persuasion."

Selzer key findings:

• Nelson does little revising, spends 5 percent of his time revising, he hands a draft to his secretary and then only makes minor edits.
• He spents significant time thinking about his audience's needs, interests, and knowledge (80 percent of time inventing or researching).
• Has the ability to reuse documents and incorporate them into new documents.
• He had stylistic rules that he followed with every document (short sentence length, topic sentences in every paragraph).

MULTIPLE DATA COLLECTION METHODS
Taped discussion: Nelson responded in detail to questions about his writing sessions, their focus and their length, their conduct. DID NOT ask Nelson to compose aloud.
He went to Nelson's work and observed him (looked at his surroundings, actually watched nelson write)
Collected all of Nelson's documents.
Selzer had face-to-face interviews with Nelson.

How did he convince you his finding was true?
Not only explains what he's doing, but threads "that I saw" or "documents I examined" or "I never saw him do this.."

Pethos appeals - emotional
ethos- credibility of writer

TRIANGULATION or TRIANGULATING DATA
what i saw in interview
through observation
and looking at documents

"That means that instead of ignoring invention
and planning, as nearly all technical writing texts now do, teachers might
direct students to various ways of developing, selecting, and arranging content."