English 421Y: Technical Writing Online

     The majority of the information presented in chapter 19 of TCT is fairly new to me, at least from a low level perspective. Although the aspects that are outlined throughout the chapter are common, the ways in which they are utilized to produce clear and effective descriptions for users are relatively new in concept. For example, chapter 19 presents formatting and structure guidelines as well as how to relate the descriptions to users through the use of senses, similes, analogies, metaphors, and graphics. Although I’ve not written many technical descriptions, in my line of work I reference them often and can see how these methods and techniques will prove effective in the upcoming project as well as throughout my career in information technology.
     Chapter 20 also presents formatting and structure guidelines, but applied to technical instructions. One of the interesting things from this week’s readings is how similar chapters 19 and 20 are, and how often they reference concepts covered previously in this course. For example, each chapter references the importance of research and planning, specifically “the Five-W and How Questions” that we’ve covered a number of times, as well as how to proceed after collecting the necessary research. Chapter 20 also directly references the different categories of a target audience, including primary, secondary, tertiary, and gatekeeper readers, as well as the context in which the documents will be read. Considering these aspects is now part of my standard planning procedure in drafting any documents. For instance, recently I was tasked with drafting a reference document, similar to a White Paper, regarding a Java application I had written for ITaP. In doing so, I used the techniques and guidelines we’ve covered throughout this course, many of which are also covered in chapters 19 and 20, to anticipate the needs and reading contexts of those that would use it. I had to account for the direct users of the application, who are less experienced; management, who is concerned more with tangible benefits than application logic; and fellow programmers that would maintain the application, who are considered to be subject matter experts. I feel the result was infinitely more professional and effective than anything I could have drafted prior to this course.
     As far as instructions are concerned, it is never wise to treat end-users like ‘idiots.’ Actually, it’s never wise to treat anyone like an idiot, but definitely avoid doing so when trying to relay information to someone that likely doesn’t want to be listening anyways. This is precisely why; most users don’t want to read instructions in the first place so demeaning them will not prove beneficial and further violates the user-centered approach. In treating users like idiots, you instill a negative perspective in the user and this drawback is obvious as the users will likely not finish reading the document and retrieving the information they desire. Furthermore, users talk, and bad publicity is worse than no publicity.
     Finally, the Common Craft video “Google Docs in Plain English” was an amazing application of the concepts covered in this week’s readings. Its use of animation and graphics, in addition to the overall structure, clearly showed that Common Craft anticipated the needs and familiarity of the end users. The presentation was clear and precise in demonstrating how to begin using Google Docs, as well as the benefits one stands to gain in doing so. I was thoroughly impressed by the effectiveness of this video.