Tech Communicator as an Information Designer
I find that in many aspects of writing definitions are difficult to agree upon. When asked to describe what I do or what I teach I often find myself struggling to come up with a concise and appropriate description. Part of this complication is because what I do and/or teach is constantly evolving. This is particularly true if I’m trying to describe the role of “rhetoric” in what I do. So, when reading the texts for this week I realized that technical communicators probably always had a difficult time defining what they did and it has only become more complicated as communication technologies have changed.
Carliner provides early evidence of this when he states, “The Vienna-based International Institute of Information Design (1997) admits that information design ‘can be hard to define, because it is an interdisciplinary approach which combines skills in graphic design, writing and editing, illustration, and human factors. Information designers seek to combine skills in these fields to make complex information easier to understand’”(43). However, he doesn’t seem to accept the-it’s just too difficult to describe-approach and continues by adding, “Because design is focused on solving problems, a design theory must provide more than a series of guidelines about discrete characteristics of the solution; it must focus designers on identifying the problem and supplying a framework for identifying and considering the interrelated issues that must be addressed in a solution” (44).
Although Carliner goes on to describe a more detailed and structured framework and acknowledges both the benefits and the drawbacks to such an approach the difficulty of “definition” is echoed in Abers text.
Because I find most of the “definitions” reader/user-centered and the focus on purpose and context, I can’t help but to feel that writing (whether technical or otherwise) defies definition. As texts become more “visual” and readers become my diverse what and how we write will continue to change. This difficulty for definition is both ironic and liberating. I find this liberating because it allows us as teachers and researchers continue to be relevant and interested in what we do and how we do it.
Nicole, I'd never consider how hard it would be to explain the teaching of composition and rhetoric. The liberating aspect of vaguely defined practices is unique, but do you also find it a little frustrating professionally? Maybe it's the location of the practice. Then again, maybe not. I've worked in a few places where people would look at tech writers funny in R&D meetings, wondering why we were there.
ReplyDeleteI'm curious what you make about the evolution of information design from Albers as it compares to Carliner's statement that definitions are complex. I mean, Carliner takes care to explain how document design and information design are often conflated, but I'm not sure if document design compares to the evolving range of definitions we see in Albers. Do you agree with the implications of Carliner's assertion that design is an umbrella term that encompasses both document and information design?
ReplyDelete