Engineering Communication

doi:10.1017/CBO9781139013451.038

Chapter 30 - Engineering Communication

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 February 2015

Marie C. Paretti ,

Lisa D. McNair and

Jon A. Leydens

Edited by

Aditya Johri and

Barbara M. Olds

Show author details

Marie C. Paretti: Affiliation:
Virginia Tech
Lisa D. McNair: Affiliation:
Virginia Tech
Jon A. Leydens: Affiliation:
Colorado School of Mines
Aditya Johri: Affiliation:
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Barbara M. Olds: Affiliation:
Colorado School of Mines

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Communication has long been considered a core professional skill and one clearly central to global engineering practice. In Sales’ (2006) survey of U.K. engineers, more than 50% of her respondents spent more than 40% of their time on writing. In Australia, surveys by Male, Bush, and Chapman consistently identify communication as a critical (and deficient) quality in engineering graduates (Male, Bush, & Chapman, 2010, 2011). Surveys by Tenopir and King (2004) and Covington, Barksdale, Egan-Warren, Larsen, and Trunzo (2007) found that U.S. engineers spent upwards of 30% of their time writing and speaking, while Kreth's (2000) survey of U.S. graduates indicated that new engineers spent, on average, 38% of their time writing. In non–English-speaking regions and countries, the prevalence of English for Special Purposes (ESP), English for Academic Purposes (EAP), and second language (L2, sometimes referred to as English as a Foreign Language, or EFL) instruction for engineers attests to the ongoing need for communication competency in English as well as in engineers’ native languages (e.g., Cismas, 2010; Orr et al., 1995).

Beyond its ubiquity in practice, engineering communication can profoundly affect both the development and the impact of technology. Most dramatically, as studies of the U.S. space shuttle Challenger explosion and the near-meltdown of the Three Mile Island nuclear facility demonstrate, failures in engineering communication are often central factors in engineering disasters (e.g., Dombrowski, 1992; Herndl, Fennell, & Miller, 1991; Winsor, 1988). Even a failure to appropriately identify units of measure can cost millions, as in the case of the NASA orbiter developed by Lockheed Martin (Isbell, Hardin, & Underwood, 1999). Effective communication in engineering environments, such cases remind us, can have exceptionally high stakes.

Type: Chapter
Information: Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research , pp. 601 - 632

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139013451.038 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

ABET Engineering Accreditation Commission (2007). Criteria for accrediting engineering programs. Baltimore, MD: ABET, Inc.Google Scholar

Airey, J. (2011). The disciplinary literacy discussion matrix: A heuristic tool for initiating collaboration in higher education. Across the Disciplines, 8(3). Retrieved from Google Scholar

Artemeva, N. (2005). A time to speak, a time to act: A rhetorical genre analysis of a novice engineer's calculated risk taking. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 19(4), 389–421.CrossRef Google Scholar

Artemeva, N. (2007, August). Becoming an engineering communicator: Novices learning engineering genres. In Bonini, A., de Carvalho Figueiredo, D., & Rauen, F. J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Genre Studies, Tubarão, Brazil (pp. 253–265).Google Scholar

Artemeva, N. (2008). Toward a unified social theory of genre learning. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 22(2), 160–185.CrossRef Google Scholar

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.CrossRef Google Scholar

Ballentine, B. D. (2008). Professional communication and a ‘whole new mind’: Engaging with ethics, intellectual property design, and globalization. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 51(3), 328–340.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Hurley, M. M., & Wilkinson, B. (2004). The effects of school-based writing-to-learn interventions on academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 29–58.CrossRef Google Scholar

Barton, D., Hamilton, M., & Ivanič, R. (Eds.). (2000). Situated literacies: Reading and writing in context. London: Routledge.

Bazerman, C., Krut, R., Lunsford, K., McLeod, S., Rogers, P., & Stansell, A. (Eds.). (2010). Traditions of writing research. New York, NY: Routledge.

Bazerman, C., & Prior, P. (Eds.). (2004). What writing does and how it does it: An introduction to analyzing texts and textual practices. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Bazerman, C., & Russell, D. R. (Eds.). (1994). Landmark essays on writing across the curriculum. Davis, CA: Hemagoras Press.

Bean, J. (1996). Engaging ideas: The professor's guide to integrating writing, critical thinking, and active learning in the classroom (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Bean, J. (2011). Engaging ideas: The professor's guide to integrating writing, critical thinking, and active learning in the classroom (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

Beaufort, A. (2007). College writing and beyond: A new framework for university writing instruction. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press.Google Scholar

Berkenkotter, C., & Huckin, T. (1995). Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication: Cognition/culture/power. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Berkenkotter, C., Huckin, T., & Ackerman, J. (1994). Social context and socially constructed texts: The initiation of a graduate student into a writing research community. In Bazerman, C. & Russell, D. R. (Eds.), Landmark essays: Writing across the curriculum (Vol. 6, pp. 211–232). Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press.Google Scholar

Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P., & Pinch, T. J. (1987). The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Björk, L., Bräuer, G., Rienecker, L., & Stray Jörgensen, P. (Eds.). (2003). Teaching academic writing in European higher education (Vol. 12). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRef

Bøhn, J. H., & Anderl, R. (2005). Transatlantic curse on 24/7 collaborative engineering and product data management. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Southeast Section Conference. Retrieved from

Boiarsky, C. (2004). Teaching engineering students to communicate effectively: A metacognitive approach. International Journal of Engineering Education, 20(2), 251–260.Google Scholar

Borrego, M. (2007). Conceptual difficulties experienced by trained engineers learning educational research methods. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(2), 91–102.CrossRef Google Scholar

Borrego, M., Douglas, E., & Amelink, C. T. (2009). Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed research methods in engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 98(1), 53–66.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Brinkman, G. W., & van der Geest, T. M. (2003). Assessment of communication competencies in engineering design projects. Technical Communication Quarterly, 12(1), 67–81.CrossRef Google Scholar

Burnett, R. (2008, September). Refiguring technologies in multimodal communication: Ways to improve engagement and learning. Paper presented at the Bedford/St. Martin's Composition Symposium, Denver, CO.Google Scholar

Burrows, V. A., McNeill, B., Hubele, N. F., & Bellamy, L. (2001). Statistical evidence for enhanced learning of content through reflective journal writing. Journal of Engineering Education, 90(4), 661–667.CrossRef Google Scholar

Carlson, P. A., & Berry, F. C. (2003). CPR: A tool for addressing EC2000, Item ‘g’ – Ability to Communicate Effectively (WIP). In Proceedings of the ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Retrieved from

Carlson, P. A., & Berry, F. C. (2008). Using computer-mediated peer review in an engineering design course. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 51(3), 264–279.CrossRef Google Scholar

Carter, M., Ferzli, M., & Wiebe, E. (2007). Writing to learn by learning to write in the disciplines. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 21(3), 278–302.CrossRef Google Scholar

Cismas, S. C. (2010, July). Foreign language technical writing abilities for power engineering students in the polytechnic university of Bucharest. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 7th WSEAS International Conference on Engineering Education, Corfu Island, Greece.

Cole, M., Engeström, Y., & Vasquez, O. (Eds.). (1997). Mind, culture, and activity: Seminal papers from the laboratory of comparative human cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. (2006). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar

Connors, R. J. (1982). The rise of technical writing instruction in America. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 12(4), 329–352.Google Scholar

Conrad, S., Dusicka, P., Pfeiffer, T., & Evans, R. (2009). Work in progress – A new approach for understanding student and workplace writing in engineering. In Proceedings of the ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Retrieved from CrossRef

Conrad, S., & Pfeiffer, T. J. (2011). Preliminary analysis of student and workplace writing in civil engineering. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. Retrieved from

Coppola, N. W., Hiltz, S. R., & Rotter, N. G. (2004). Building trust in virtual teams. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 47(2), 95–104.CrossRef Google Scholar

Covington, D., Barksdale, E., Egan-Warren, S., Larsen, J., & Trunzo, S. (2007). Communication in the workplace: What can NC State students expect?Raleigh: North Carolina State University. Retrieved from Google Scholar

Craig, J. L., Lerner, N., & Poe, M. (2008). Innovation across the curriculum: Three case studies in teaching science and engineering communication. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 51(3), 280–301.CrossRef Google Scholar

Dannels, D. P. (2000). Learning to be professional: Technical classroom discourse, practice, and professional identity construction. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 14(1), 5–37.CrossRef Google Scholar

Dannels, D. P. (2002). Communication across the curriculum and in the disciplines: Speaking in engineering. Communication Education, 51(3), 254–268.CrossRef Google Scholar

Dannels, D. P. (2003). Teaching and learning design presentations in engineering: Contradictions between academic and workplace activity systems. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 17(2), 139–169.CrossRef Google Scholar

Dannels, D. P., Berardinelle, P., Anson, C. M., Bullard, L., Kleid, N., Kmeic, D., & Peretti, S. (2003). Integrating teaming, writing, and speaking in CHE Unit Operations Lab. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. Retrieved from

Dannels, D. P., & Martin, K. N. (2008). Critiquing critiques: A genre analysis of feedback across novice to expert design studios. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 22(2), 135–159.CrossRef Google Scholar

Davis, D., Beyerlein, S., Harrison, O., Thompson, P., & Trevisan, M. (2007). Assessments for three performance areas in capstone engineering design. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. Retrieved from

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

Dombrowski, P. (1992). Challenger and the social contingency of meaning: Two lesson for the technical communication classroom. Technical Communication Quarterly, 1(1), 73–85.CrossRef Google Scholar

Downey, G. L., Lucena, J. C., Moskal, B., Parkhurst, R., Bigley, T., Hays, C.,… Nichols-Belo, A. (2006). The globally competent engineer: Working effectively with people who define problems differently. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 107–122.CrossRef Google Scholar

Driskill, L. (2000). Linking industry best practices and EC3(g) Assessment in Engineering Communication. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. Retrieved from

Elliot, N., & Perelman, L. (Eds.). (2012). Writing assessment in the 21st Century: Essays in honor of Edward M. White. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Engeström, Y., & Middleton, D. (Eds.). (1998). Cognition and communication at work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punämaki, R.-L. (Eds.). (1999). Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Engineering Council. (2011). The accreditation of higher education programmes: UK standard for professional engineering competence. London: Engineering Council.Google Scholar

Engineers Australia. (2011). Stage 1 competency standard for the professional engineer. Barton ACT: Engineers Australia.Google Scholar

Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar

Farrell, L., & Holkner, B. A. M. U. A. (2004). Points of vulnerability and presence: Knowing and learning in globally networked communities. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 25(2), 133–144.Google Scholar

Flowerdew, L. (2011). ESP and corpus studies. In Belcher, D., Johns, A. M. & Paltridge, B. (Eds.), New directions for ESP research (pp. 222–251). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar

Ford, J. D. (2004). Knowledge transfer across disciplines: Tracking rhetorical strategies from a technical communication classroom to an engineering classroom. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 47(4), 1–15.CrossRef Google Scholar

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

Fruchter, R., & Lewis, S. (2001). Mentoring models in an A/E/C global teamwork e-learning environment. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. Retrieved from

Gee, J. P. (2005). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar

Geisler, C. (1993). The relationship between language and design in mechanical engineering: Some preliminary observations. Technical Communication, 40(1), 173–175.Google Scholar

Geisler, C., & Lewis, B. (2007). Remaking the world through talk and text: What we should learn from how engineers use language to design. In Horowitz, R. (Ed.), Talking texts: How speech and writing interact in school learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Geisler, C., Rogers, E., & Haller, C. R. (1998). Disciplining discourse: Discourse practices in the affiliated professions of software engineering design. Written Communication, 15(1), 3–24.CrossRef Google Scholar

Gianniny, O. A. (2004). A century of ASEE and liberal education (or how did we get here from there, and where does it all lead?). In Ollis, D. F., Neeley, K. A., & Luegenbiehl, H. C. (Eds.), Liberal education in twenty-first century engineering: Responses to ABET/EC 2000 criteria (pp. 320–346). New York, NY: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Gonzalez, A., Weiser, E., & Fehler, B. (Eds.). (2009). Engaging audience: Writing in an age of new literacies. Urbana, IL: NCTE Press.

Gosavi, A. (2010). Building communication skills through virtual teaming. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. Retrieved from

Gustafsson, M. (Ed.). (2011). Collaborating for content and language integrated learning [Special Issue]. Across the Disciplines 8(3). Retrieved from

Gustafsson, M., Eriksson, A., Räisänen, C., Stenberg, A.-C., Jacobs, C., Wright, J.,… Winberg, C. (2011). Collaborating for content and language integrated learning: The situated character of faculty collaboration and student learning. Across the Disciplines, 8(3). Retrieved from Google Scholar

Hanson, J. H., & Williams, J. M. (2008). Using writing assignments to improve self-assessment and communication skills in an engineering statics course. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(4), 515–530.CrossRef Google Scholar

Harran, M. (2011). Engineering and language discourse collaboration: Practice realities. Across the Disciplines, 8(3). Retrieved from Google Scholar

Hendricks, R. W., & Pappas, E. C. (1996). Advanced engineering communication: An integrated writing and communication program for materials engineers. Journal of Engineering Education, 85(4), 343–352.CrossRef Google Scholar

Herndl, C. G., Fennell, B., & Miller, C. (1991). Understanding failures in organizational discourse: The accident at Three Mile Island and the shuttle Challenger disaster. In Bazerman, C. & Paradis, J. (Eds.), Textual dynamics of the professions (pp. 279–305). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar

Herrington, A. J. (1985). Writing in academic settings: A study of the contexts for writing in two college chemical engineering courses. In Bazerman, C. & Russell, D. R. (Eds.), Landmark essays on writing across the curriculum (Vol. 6, pp. 97–124). Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press.Google Scholar

Hirsch, P., Shwom, B., Yarnoff, C., Anderson, J. C., Kelso, D. M., Olson, G. B., & Colgate, J. E. (2001). Engineering design and communication: The case for interdisciplinary collaboration. International Journal of Engineering Education, 17(4–5), 342–348.Google Scholar

House, R., Livingston, J., Minster, M., Taylor, C., Watt, A., & Williams, J. (2009). Assessing engineering communication in the technical classroom: The case of Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. In Paretti, M. C. & Powell, K. (Eds.), Assessment of writing (pp. 127–158). Tallahassee, FL: Association of Institutional Research.Google Scholar

Howe, S. (2012). Capstone design hub: Building the capstone design community. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. Retrieved from

Huot, B. (2002). (Re)Articulating writing assessment for teaching and learning. Logan: Utah State University Press.Google Scholar

Huot, B., & O’Neill, P. (2008). Assessing writing: A critical sourcebook. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins.Google Scholar

Isbell, D., Hardin, M., & Underwood, J. (1999). Mars climate orbiter team finds likely cause of loss. Retrieved from mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msp98/news/mco990930.html

Jacobs, C. (2010). Collaboration as pedagogy: Consequences and implications for partnerships between communication and disciplinary specialists. Southern African Linguistics & Applied Language Studies, 28(3), 227–237.CrossRef Google Scholar

Jarratt, S. C., Mack, K., Sartor, A., & Watson, S. E. (2009).Pedagogical memory: Writing, mapping, translating. WPA: Writing Program Administration, 33(1–2), 46–73.Google Scholar

Kennedy, G. (1998). An introduction to corpus linguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Kiesler, S., & Cummings, J. N. (2002). What do we know about proximity and distance in work groups? A legacy of research. In Hinds, P. & Kiesler, S. (Eds.), Distributed work (pp. 57–80). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Klein, P. D. (1999). Reopening inquiry into cognitive processes in writing-to-learn. Educational Psychology Review, 11(3), 203–270.CrossRef Google Scholar

Kock, N. (2005). Media richness or media naturalness? The evolution of our biological communication apparatus and its influence on our behavior toward E-communication tools. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 48(2), 117–130.CrossRef Google Scholar

Kock, N., & Nosek, J. (2005). Expanding the boundaries of E-collaboration. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 48(1), 1–9.CrossRef Google Scholar

Kreth, M. L. (2000). A survey of the co-op writing experiences of recent engineering graduates. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 43(2), 137–151.CrossRef Google Scholar

Krishnamurthy, R., & Kosem, I. (2007). Issues in creating a corpus for EAP pedagogy and research. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(4), 356–373.CrossRef Google Scholar

Kynell-Hunt, T., & Savage, G. J. (Eds.). (2003). Power and legitimacy in technical communication, Vol. 1: The historical and contemporary struggle for professional status. Amityville, NY: Baywood.

Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Lattuca, L. R., Terenzini, P. T., & Volkwein, J. F. (2006). Engineering change: A study of the impact of EC 2000. Baltimore, MD: ABET, Inc.Google Scholar

Lave, J., & Wegner, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Lea, M., & Street, B. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 157–172.CrossRef Google Scholar

Levine, K. J., Allard, S., & Tenopir, C. (2011). The changing communication patterns of engineers [Point of View]. Proceedings of the IEEE, 99(7), 1155–1157.CrossRef Google Scholar

Leydens, J. A. (2008). Novice and insider perspectives on academic and workplace writing: Toward a continuum of rhetorical awareness. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 51(3), 242–263.CrossRef Google Scholar

Leydens, J. A. (2012a). Sociotechnical communication in engineering: An exploration and unveiling of common myths. Engineering Studies, 4(1), 1–9.CrossRef Google Scholar

Leydens, J. A. (2012b). What does professional communication research have to do with social justice? Intersections and sources of resistance. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Professional Communication Conference. Retrieved from

Leydens, J. A., & Lucena, J. C. (2009). Listening as a missing dimension in engineering education: Implications for sustainable community development efforts. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 52(4), 359–376.CrossRef Google Scholar

Leydens, J. A., Lucena, J. C., & Schneider, J. (2012). Are engineering and social justice (in)commensurable? A theoretical exploration of macro-sociological frameworks. International Journal of Engineering, Social Justice and Peace, 1(1), 63–82.CrossRef Google Scholar

Leydens, J. A., Moskal, B. M., & Pavelich, M. (2004). Qualitative methods used in the assessment of engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(1), 65–72.CrossRef Google Scholar

Leydens, J. A., & Schneider, J. (2009). Innovations in composition programs that educate engineers: Drivers, opportunities, and challenges. Journal of Engineering Education, 98(3), 255–271.CrossRef Google Scholar

Lucena, J. C., Schneider, J., & Leydens, J. A. (2010). Engineering and sustainable community development. San Rafael, CA: Morgan & Claypool.Google Scholar

Locke, D. M. (1992). Science as writing. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Male, S., Bush, M., & Chapman, E. (2010). Perceptions of competency deficiencies of engineering graduates. Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 16(1), 55–67.CrossRef Google Scholar

Male, S., Bush, M., & Chapman, E. (2011). Understanding generic engineering competencies. Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 17(3), 147–156.CrossRef Google Scholar

Mathison, M. (2000). “I don't have to argue my design–the visual speaks for itself’: A case study of mediated activity in an introductory mechanical engineering course. In Michell, S. & Andrews, R. (Eds.), Learning to argue in higher education (pp. 74–84). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.Google Scholar

Matusovich, H., Paretti, M. C., Motto, A., & Cross, K. J. (2012). Understanding faculty and student beliefs about teamwork & communication skills. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. Retrieved from

McCarthy, L. P. (1994). A stranger in strange lands: A college student writing across the curriculum. In Bazerman, C. & Russell, D. R. (Eds.), Landmark essays: Writing across the curriculum (Vol. 6, pp. 125–155). Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press.Google Scholar

McEnery, T., & Wilson, A. (2001). Corpus linguistics (2nd ed.). Edinburgh, UK: University of Edinburgh Press.Google Scholar

McNair, L. D., & Garrison, W. (2012). Portfolios to professoriate: Helping students integrate professional identities through ePortfolios. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. Retrieved from

McNair, L. D., & Paretti, M. C. (2010). Activity theory, speech acts, and the ‘‘doctrine of infelicity’’: Connecting language and technology in globally networked learning environments. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 24(3), 323–357.CrossRef Google Scholar

McNair, L. D., Paretti, M. C., & Davitt, M. (2010). Towards a pedagogy of relational space and trust: Analyzing distributed collaboration using discourse and speech act analysis. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 53(3), 233–248.CrossRef Google Scholar

McNair, L. D., Paretti, M. C., Knott, M., & Wolfe, M. L. (2006). Work in progress: Using e-Portfolio to define, teach, and assess ABET professional skills. In Proceedings of the ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Retrieved from CrossRef

Miller, C. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70(2), 151–167.CrossRef Google Scholar

National Academy of Engineering (NAE). (2004). The engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar

Nystrand, M. (1982). What writers know: The language, process, and structure of written discourse. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Orr, T. (2006). Introduction to the special issue: Insights from corpus linguistics for professional communication. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 49(3), 213–216.CrossRef Google Scholar

Orr, T., Bowers, R., Busch, D., Kushner, S., Mueller, E., & de Prospero, A. (1995). Serving science and technology: Five programs around the globe (Tech. Rep. No. 95–5–001). Aizuwakamatsu, Japan: University of Aizu; reproduced by ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 389 173.Google Scholar

Ostheimer, M. W., & White, E. M. (2005). Reliable data verify that curriculum reform made in response to portfolio assessment findings improves student writing: Successful writing portfolio assessment at the University of Arizona's Electrical and Computer Engineering Department improves student writing. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. Retrieved from

Pappas, E. C., & Hendricks, R. W. (2000). Holistic grading in science and engineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 89(2), 403–408.CrossRef Google Scholar

Pappas, E. C., Kampe, S. L., & Hendricks, R. W. (2004). An assessment methodology and its application to an advanced engineering communications program. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 233–246.CrossRef Google Scholar

Paretti, M. C. (2005, June 14). Using project portfolios to assess design in materials science and engineering. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. Retrieved from

Paretti, M. C. (2006). Audience awareness: Leveraging problem-based learning to teach workplace communication practice. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 49(6), 189–198.CrossRef Google Scholar

Paretti, M. C. (2008). Teaching communication in capstone design: The role of the instructor in situated learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(4), 491–503.CrossRef Google Scholar

Paretti, M. C. (2009). When the teacher is the audience: Assignment design and assessment in the absence of “real” readers. In Gonzalez, A., Weiser, E., & Fehler, B. (Eds.), Engaging audience: Writing in an age of new literacies (pp. 165–185). Urbana, IL: NCTE Press.Google Scholar

Paretti, M. C. (2011, January). Theories of language and content together: The case for interdisciplinarity. Paper presented at the Dynamic content and language collaboration in higher education: theory, research, and reflections, Cape Town, South Africa.Google Scholar

Paretti, M. C., & Burgoyne, C. B. (2005a). Integrating engineering and communication: A study of capstone design courses. In Proceedings of the ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Retrieved from

Paretti, M. C., & Burgoyne, C. B. (2005b). Work-in-progress: An integrated engineering communications curriculum for the 21st century. In Proceedings of the ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Retrieved from

Paretti, M. C., & Burgoyne, C. B. (2009). Assessing excellence: Using activity theory to understand assessment practices in engineering communication. In Proceedings of the ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Retrieved from CrossRef

Paretti, M. C., & McNair, L. D. (2008a). Communicating in global virtual teams: Managing complex activity systems. In Zemliansky, P. & Amant, K. St. (Eds.), Handbook of research on virtual workplaces and the new nature of business practices (pp. 24–38). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.CrossRef Google Scholar

Paretti, M. C., & McNair, L. D. (2012). Analyzing the intersections of institutional and discourse identities in engineering work at the local level. Engineering Studies, 4(1), 55–78.CrossRef Google Scholar

Paretti, M. C., & McNair, L. D. (Eds.). (2008b). Communication in engineering curricula [Special issue]. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 51(3).CrossRef

Paretti, M. C., McNair, L. D., Belanger, K., & George, D. (2009). Reformist possibilities? Exploring cross-campus writing partnerships. WPA: Writing Program Administration, 33(1–2), 74–113.Google Scholar

Paretti, M. C., McNair, L. D., & Holloway-Attaway, L. (2007). Teaching technical communication in an era of distributed work: A case study of collaboration between U.S. and Swedish students. Technical Communication Quarterly, 16(3), 327–352.CrossRef Google Scholar

Paretti, M. C., & Powell, K. (2009a). Introduction: Bringing voices together: Partnerships for assessing writing across contexts. In Paretti, M. C. & Powell, K. (Eds.), Assessment of writing (pp. 1–10). Tallahassee, FL: Association of Institutional Research.Google Scholar

Paretti, M. C., & Powell, K. M. (Eds.). (2009b). Assessment of writing. Tallahassee, FL: Association for Institutional Research.

Patton, M. D. (2008). Beyond WI: Building an integrated communication curriculum in one department of civil engineering. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 51(3), 313–327.CrossRef Google Scholar

Perelman, L. C. (1999). The two rhetorics: Design and interpretation in engineering and humanistic discourse. Language and Learning Across the Disciplines, 3(2), 64–82.Google Scholar

Poe, M., Lerner, N., & Craig, J. (2010). Learning to communicate in science and engineering: Case studies from MIT. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Reave, L. (2004). Technical communication instruction in engineering schools: A survey of top-ranked U.S. and Canadian programs. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 18(4), 452–490.CrossRef Google Scholar

Robert, L. P., & Dennis, A. R. (2005). Paradox of richness: A cognitive model of media choice. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 48(1), 10–21.CrossRef Google Scholar

Roberts, T. L., Lowry, P. B., & Sweeney, P. D. (2006). An evaluation of the impact of social presence through group size and the use of collaborative software on group member “voice” in face-to-face and computer-mediated task groups. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 49(1), 28–43.CrossRef Google Scholar

Robey, D., Khoo, H. M., & Powers, C. (2004). Situated learning in cross-functional virtual teams. In Dubinksy, J. (Ed.), Teaching technical communication: Critical issues for the classroom (pp. 541–567). Boston: Bedford St. Martins.Google Scholar

Russell, D. R. (1997). Rethinking genre in school and society: An activity theory analysis. Written Communication, 14(4), 504–554.CrossRef Google Scholar

Russell, D. R. (2002). Writing in the academic disciplines: A curricular history (2nd ed.). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar

Rutkowski, A. F., Vogel, D. R., van Genuchten, M., Bemelmans, T. M. A., & Favier, M. (2002). E-Collaboration: The reality of virtuality. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 45(4), 219–230.CrossRef Google Scholar

Sageev, P., & Romanowski, C. J. (2001). A message from recent engineering graduates in the marketplace: Results of a survey on technical communication skills. Journal of Engineering Education, 90(4), 685–697.CrossRef Google Scholar

Sales, H. E. (2006). Professional communication in engineering. Basingstoke, UK and New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRef Google Scholar

Schneider, J., Leydens, J. A., Olds, B., & Miller, R. (2009). Guiding principles in engineering writing assessment: Context, collaboration, and ownership. In Paretti, M. C. & Powell, K. (Eds.), Assessment of writing (pp. 65–81). Tallahassee, FL: Association of Institutional Research.Google Scholar

Scott, C., & Plumb, C. (1999). Using portfolios to evaluate service courses as part of an engineering writing program. Technical Communication Quarterly, 8(3), 337–350.CrossRef Google Scholar

Selfe, C. L. (2007). Multimodal composition: Resources for teachers. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar

Sheridan, D. M., & Inman, J. A. (2010). Multiliteracy centers: Writing center work, new media, and multimodal rhetoric. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar

Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

Shwom, B., Hirsch, P., Yarnoff, C., & Anderson, J. C. (1999). Engineering design and communication: A foundational course for freshmen. Language and Learning Across the Disciplines, 3(2), 107–112.Google Scholar

Slack, J. D., Miller, D. J., & Doak, J. (2003). The technical communicator as author: Meaning, power, authority. In Kynell-Hunt, T. & Savage, G. J. (Eds.), Power and legitimacy in technical communication, Vol. 1: The historical and contemporary struggle for professional status (pp. 169–192). Amityville, NY: Baywood.Google Scholar

Smith, S. (2003). What is ‘good’ technical communication? A comparison of the standards of writing and engineering instructors. Technical Communication Quarterly, 12(1), 7–24.CrossRef Google Scholar

Smith Taylor, S. (2011). “I really don't know what he meant by that”: How well do engineering students understand teachers’ comments on their writing?Technical Communication Quarterly, 20(2), 139–166.CrossRef Google Scholar

Spinuzzi, C. (1996). Pseudotransactionality, activity theory, and professional writing instruction. Technical Communication Quarterly, 5(3), 295–308.CrossRef Google Scholar

Spinuzzi, C. (2003). Tracing genres through organizations: A sociocultural approach to information design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Spurlin, J. E., Rajala, S. A., & Lavelle, J. P. (Eds.). (2008). Designing better engineering education through assessment: A practical resource for faculty and department chairs on using assessment and ABET criteria to improve student learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Swarts, J., & Odell, L. (2001). Rethinking the evaluation of writing in engineering courses. In Proceedings of the ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Retrieved from CrossRef

Tenopir, C., & King, D. W. (2004). Communications patterns of engineerings. Piscataway, NJ: Wiley-Interscience: IEEE Press.Google Scholar

Thaiss, C. (2010). The international WAC/WID mapping project: Objectives, methods, and early results. In Bazerman, C., Krut, R., Lundsford, K., McLeod, S., Null, S., Rogers, P., & Stansell, A. (Eds.), Traditions of writing research (pp. 251–264). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar

Thaiss, C., & Zawacki, T. M. (2006). Engaged writers and dynamic disciplines: Research on the academic writing life. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar

Turns, J., & Lappenbusch, S. (2006). Tracing student development during construction of engineering professional portfolios. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. Retrieved from

Turns, J., Sattler, B., Eliot, M., Kilgore, D., & Mobrand, K. (2012). Preparedness portfolios and portfolio studios. International Journal of ePortfolio, 2(1). Retrieved from Google Scholar

The VALUE Project Overview. (2009). Peer Review, 11(1), 4–7.

Venters, C., McNair, L. D., & Paretti, M. C. (2012). Using writing assignments to improve conceptual understanding in statics: Results from a pilot study. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. Retrieved from

Vygotsky, L. S. (1962/1986). Thought and language (Rev. ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Walther, J. B., & Bunz, U. (2005). The rules of virtual groups: Trust, liking, and performance in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Communication, 55(4), 828–846.CrossRef Google Scholar

Williams, J. M. (2001). Transformations in technical communication pedagogy: Engineering, writing, and the ABET Engineering Criteria 2000. Technical Communication Quarterly, 10(2), 149–167.CrossRef Google Scholar

Williams, J. M. (2002). The engineering portfolio: Communication, reflection, and student learning outcomes assessment. International Journal of Engineering Education, 18(2), 199–207.Google Scholar

Winsor, D. A. (1988). Communication failures contributing to the Challenger accident: An example for technical communicators. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 31(3), 101–108.CrossRef Google Scholar

Winsor, D. A. (1996). Writing like an engineer: A rhetorical education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Winsor, D. A. (2003). Writing power: Communication in an engineering center. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar

Winsor, D. A. (2006). Using writing to structure agency: An examination of engineers’ practice. Technical Communication Quarterly, 15(4), 411–430.CrossRef Google Scholar

Wolfe, J. (2009). How technical communication textbooks fail engineering students. Technical Communication Quarterly, 18(4), 351–375.CrossRef Google Scholar

Wolfe, J., & Powell, E. (2009). Biases in interpersonal communication: How engineering students perceive gender typical speech acts in teamwork. Journal of Engineering Education, 98(1), 5–16.CrossRef Google Scholar

Yancey, K. B., & Huot, B. (Eds.). (1997). Assessing writing across the curriculum: Diverse approaches and practices. Greenwich, CT: Ablex.

Youra, S. (1999). Letter from the guest editor. Language and Learning Across the Disciplines, 3(2), 1–12.Google Scholar

Zamel, V., & Spack, R. (Eds.). (1998). Negotiating academic literacies: Teaching and learning across languages and cultures. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.