Book Review
Review of:
Sue Mehlich
Technical Communication: Writing Instructions
(Logan, IA: Perfection Learning Corp., 1997)
32 pages, $6.95
Reviewed by: T. R. Girill, STC Fellow, trg@llnl.gov, August
2000
This 32-page miniature textbook specifically for high school
students (and its accompanying 32-page teacher's manual) aims
to present one aspect of technical communication (writing instructions)
in a coordinated set of lessons and classroom activities intended
to span "two to three weeks." The content is sound, the presentation
format is clear and effective, and the choice of writing techniques
covered is relevant and appropriate. I would use these booklets
to teach instruction writing to high school students, but I would
not use them alone. A closer look at the textbook's strengths
and weaknesses reveals why.
The core of this book (pp. 16-25) has several valuable strengths.
- Good model instructions.
The models, nicely set apart from the text, offer positive examples
of well-presented instructions. They are detailed, showcase
many important features, and call for no special technical knowledge
to understand (e.g., how to clean closets).
- Good guidelines (overt checklists).
Mehlich offers three itemized sets of instructions for instructions,
covering drafting, design (format), and revision. All make the
described writing techniques clear and explicit, with examples.
(Separate "tip" inserts describe more techniques, but strangely
are not integrated with the rest of the text.)
- Good practice.
The exercises, though scarce (see below), are thoughtful and
focused. They cover the prime activities of reorganizing and
explicating poor step-by-step instructions (20), turning prose
into overt step-by-step instructions (18), revising draft instructions
(26), and the prerequisite skills of adding key details and
defining jargon. Again, all rely on just general knowledge,
not specialized technical information.
Despite these strengths, several pedagogical weaknesses undermine
the book's teaching value:
- Coherence problems. Mehlich's commentary on her model
instructions brings up important, standard writing techniques
(chunking, branching) that she nevertheless omits completely
from her overt drafting checklist (thus inviting students to
overlook these techniques during practice). Likewise, her "tip
techniques" (on headings, bullets, and warnings) are omitted
from both the model commentary and the drafting guidelines.
And the guidelines follow, rather than precede, the student
exercise on turning prose into overt instructional steps. Ironically,
her how-to-revise guidelines are an excellent and comprehensive
blend of ALL relevant techniques, but they come near the end
of the book. Thus, the individually good parts of the book seem
never to have been integrated or coordinated into a coherent
whole.
- Sequence problems. The specific skill-building exercises
(on the order of steps, preciseness, clarity of commands) come
late in the book, even though they clearly develop basic, underlying
techniques needed for success on more complex writing tasks.
The most general and ambiguous project (turning raw prose into
overt, itemized instructions) comes first, when students are
least prepared for it. And most suprising, I think, is that
the exercise on revising overt but poorly done instructions
follows, rather than precedes, the work on drafting instructions
from scratch, even though revision practice builds analytical
and self-editing skills vital when students try the harder job
of drafting.
- Quantity problems. Although the exercises are all very
appropriate in quality, there are only 8 on providing enough
details, 3 on fixing faulty steps, and just 1 each on revising
and on turning a prose story into overt steps. There should
be at least five times as many of all types, probably more,
to allow plenty for direct classroom discussion, group/peer
practice, and homework too. Although Mehlich offers good models
to follow, there are no "worked" examples or before/after cases
(the teacher's manual does add some of these behind the scenes,
but it lacks extra exercises to assign to students).
Together these problems mean that while this book might be adequate
(if rearranged) for good writers and good learners, it fails to
offer poor writers and learners just what they need most. Poor
learners will need more worked cases to complement the guidelines,
and poor writers will need much more and better sequenced practice
to gradually build their pool of instruction-writing techniques
in a layered way, from noticing good features, to editing them
into draft instructions, to drafting them on their own.
Perhaps the book's weaknesses result from Mehlich's belief,
expressed early in the teacher's manual, that when teaching technical
writing "you don't need to add new content to your courses" but
merely "familiarize your students with the [right] conventions"
(p. 5). Although the publisher skimped on exercises, the teacher's
guide adds quite a bit of helpful background and explicitly authorizes
purchasers to make photocopies or viewgraphs for "within building"
use when they teach. And evaluation of student papers is treated
in detail as well.
This book certainly demonstrates how one might teach instruction
writing well in high school. But its weaknesses prevent it from
doing the job alone. For literacy development programs especially,
this can be a useful book, but only if taught in a different order
and if supplemented by extra examples and exercises.
|
