With the emergence of new technologies that places the world at our fingertips, college-level instruction must prepare students for the inevitable changes, opportunities, and challenges that Web 2.0 will continue to present. The internet has not only changed how we reach our destinations, it has changed where we are going. Thus Web 2.0 has exponentially changed not only how we teach but what we teach, i.e., greatly influencing the delivery and content of our communication courses. With the emergence of so many technology options, communication teachers must continually assess the goal of their instruction: Is the goal effective writing or effective communication? Do we see writing as an end in itself of is it a means to an end? Are messages communicated effectively primarlily through words on a page (or screen) or are there other equally (or more valuable) means of communication that our students need to be prepared to use? While I am first and foremost a writing teacher, my philosophy of teaching "writing" has evolved as I see the need to prepare our students to seek options that will address the communication challenges they will face in the future, challenges that require them to know how to use a variety of communication tools in conjunction with writing AND how to select the best communication options available to reach their goals. Thus, the goal of communication instruction isn't limited to good writing but must encompass clear communication. This subtle shift has resulted in an emphasis to see writing as problem solving (i.e., evaluating communication options in order to select the best solution). This importance is demonstrated in the example below.

Which is preferred? A quick lesson in technical communication

A person needing driving directions to a particular destination could use an online map application (e.g., Google Maps) for help. Which "mode" of information works best? The verbal mode (instructions) or the visual mode (map) or something else? Answering the question requires understanding the unique value of each option as it relates to the user. Choosing, organizing, creating, and delivering information requires evaluating options in light of their context of uses. Thus, communication instruction in today's classroom is essentially problem solving, requiring the need to embrace critical thinking/problem solving as an instructional goal. Current students must be able to discern between different options to select or create the best solution, and the options continue to multiply as we invent new ways of organizing and communicating information. (Consider the additional options, not discussed, that are currently available to someone needing driving directions: now we have personal assistance apps like Siri and GPS that allow real-time audio and video tracking). Therefore, our students must be to write well AND understand how to navigate the panoply of communication options available today and tomorrow.

I have taught writing in several departments and programs (in Physics, English, and Honors Programs) and in different platforms (online, face-to-face, and blended technology). Most recently, I taught technical writing (CHEN 301) in the Chemical Engineering Department at TAMU. The goal of the course was to prepare students to write effectively in the various professional workplaces they will enter. The course has traditionally been offered as a Core Curriculum course at the university and is currently required for all Chemical Engineering students. Students in the course were mostly juniors and seniors. We met face-to-face for most meetings, though I also held several class meetings in a computer lab. My classes at TAMU were usually 25 students per section, and many semesters required me to teach 4 sections, totaling approximately 100 students. Thus, the need to identify and apply pedagogies that permitted the best use of class time prompted me to keep an open mind toward technology (I would call myself an "early adopter") and proactively network with support staff and faculty to learn as much as I could about teaching in my discipline. A quick profile of my ChemE students would include that they were very smart and highly motivated (many of the National Merit Scholars who entered TAMU 2012-13 selected Chemical Engineering as their major). Since our CHEN students were strongly encouraged to secure at least one internship (or more, if possible) during their undergraduate career, most of them understood the need to prepare documentation for prospecting jobs and internships. Hence, students in my courses came eager to learn.

I find an effective teacher must commit to following a balance between sound principles in the discipline and a healthy inquiry of new innovations in methodologies. In the midst of continual changes evolving from communication tools and practices is the need to identify core principles that remain stable with the evolution of new technologies, principles that will help students understand how to navigate through the differing rhetorical contexts they will encounter in their workplaces and make the best choices for addressing the communication needs. Thus every lesson in communication begins with understanding the rhetorical context, audience and purpose, in order to communicate a message that will achieve its intended purpose. Lessons in the class are presented through cases or scenarios that introduce a new facet or variable, requiring students to think very carefully about the best approach to the context. Therefore, the best selection of genre, organization, style, design, visuals, and convention are determined by the communication context. Successive writing assignments address more complex scenarios, introducing different variables that require students to think strategically about their approach to the context. Thus instruction on more "traditional" topics (editing for clarity, for example) is integrated within the contexts where that topic can most clearly be addressed. For example, helping students understand the differences between using active and passive voice is integrated within the broader topic of instructions and procedures, where they can better understand the reasons guiding the conventions (instead of simply following suit that "it's just always done that way" without understanding why). In sum, my writing instruction and assignments require critical decision making, which presupposes students understand how and why conventions work in order to select the best solution.

Using the outcomes articulated by the program, institution, or accreditation boards for developing my course and assessing learning increases the credibility of the course at multiple levels. Since my teaching experience spans many different departments and programs, I have learned that using the outcomes already established by the organizations and review boards allows me to understand more specifically what my course needs to address for the students I am teaching. As in any discipline, the range of potential material that could be covered is very broad (which is especially the case for a technical communication course). In addition, students take only ONE technical communication course during their undergraduate career, though they may take other "W" (writing) or "C" (communication) courses in their discipline. Thus, the question that must be addressed is which set of outcomes should the course use (if not required by a particular program or course)? In the case of my engineering communication course, the outcomes I use are those created by ABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology). Therefore, I use the ABET learning outcomes to direct course development and assess learning. However, many of the ABET outcomes do not directly address writing, yet most do address skills essential to honing communication skills. And since writing (synthesis) is at the top of the learning taxonomy, mastery of the other cognitive skills are essential to writing and reflecting, i.e., self-assessing, which is valued by engineering professionals. "As part of their annual performance reviews, engineers are expected to self-assess their performances and to establish professional goals for the next year" [1]. Providing students the opportunity to develop these metacognitive skills is not delineated specifically in the ABET outcomes. But honing critical thinking / problem solving is clearly central to developing skills for writing effectively. Thus for many of the ABET outcomes, I have specified how and where communication skills are required OR I have addressed how each outcome contributes to the development of writing skills. For each outcome, I ask the following:

• What communication skills are essential to this outcome?

• How does this outcome address skills essential to communication?

The following shows the formal description of ABET outcome (c) "an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability," which clearly articulates critical thinking skills essential to communication. Since the ABET outcomes were constructed using Bloom's Taxonomy [2], the same theoretical framework of both ABET and my own technical communication outcomes directs my technical communication instruction.

ABET and Tech Comm Outcomes ‎(Sample)‎

For other courses I teach, for example, the First-Year Seminar, I have used the TAMU learning outcomes for undergraduates. In any case, mapping the course assessments to learning outcomes demonstrates a commitment to targeting the key elements (and scope) addressed by the accrediting body or the institution. See CHEN 301 Course Outcome Map, which connects the ABET communication outcomes to course assessments. For the complete set of Technical Communication Outcomes as described using the ABET outcomes, see ABET Tech Comm Outcomes Summary. In addition, both ABET and TAMU learning outcomes include "teamwork" and "collaboration," and many courses require "group work" (especially engineering courses), where students work with one another to solve homework problems and complete projects.

It can be argued that communication influences each of the essential student learning outcomes. From Stand and Deliver, University Writing Center Blog, Executive Director Valerie Balester explains how working on one of the learning outcomes, namely Communication, also helps students achieve the other six. Thus, a good technical communication course is one that incorporates the other outcomes within the framework of instruction about writing. My own courses have focused on how communication facilities the outcomes of problem solving, collaboration, social responsibility, and lifelong learning. While problem solving, collaboration, and lifelong learning through one project are described below, other outcomes, such as personal and social responsibility (ethics) are also integral to course instruction and assessments. See CHEN 301 Course Outcome Map for a details on how each assessment aligns with essential learning outcomes.

Collaborative Writing Project Integrates Communication, Teamwork, Problem Solving, and Lifelong Learning

By teaching a college-level course on the topic of technical communication, I have the opportunity to

• model the most basic principles of workplace writing through the materials I create and provide to the students

• reinforce my work ethic through my own actions

The best teacher understands the importance of demonstrating what he/she expects from their students. After all, students will absorb what they see you do more readily than what tell them in a lecture. I have very high expectations of my students: They work hard, we move fast, and I grade tough. Thus, if I expect high performance, I must clearly communicate my expectations and model the work ethic I expect students to demonstrate. I have organized the course to reflect the quality of work I expect students to complete and have found that, on the whole, they follow my lead. For example, my syllabus is comprehensive, yet detailed. The detailed schedule and precise deadlines communicate that I value organization, clarity, efficiency, and deadlines. This work ethic is exhibited by my arrival at class at least 15 minutes beforehand, having pre-loaded all materials and announcements, so that when class begins, we are ready to start. Similarly, I give students explicit deadlines for major assignments (including supporting materials and a grading rubric). I return graded assignments no later than one week from submission with a comprehensive evaluation of their work, including written and voice comments. (Thus if respect for time and effort are the values I want to uphold, I do my best to model these in the way I treat the course and student work.) I also demonstrate that I care about their learning and respect their opinions about the course and my teaching. As described in the section above, I include several checkpoints during the semester for gathering feedback from my students and making adjustments to the course based on their feedback. I DO communicate to them how and where these adjustments have been made so that they understand that I am listening to what they say. I believe that this level of rapport builds trust and increases my credibility as instructor, especially in a course where ethical issues intersect communication topics and where students need direction on how to navigate so many critical communication issues.

Key lessons learned from past teaching experience include the following:

• Make the most of class time (face-to-face instruction). Determine what can be "covered" or completed online (reading assignment materials, listening to podcasts, troubleshooting through discussion blogs, etc.) in order to make the best use of the face-to-face interaction you have with your students.

• Practice what you preach. For example, course materials should reflect the quality of writing and organization you expect from your students.

• Demonstrate a strong work ethic. Come to class on prepared and arrive on time. Grade and return papers before the next paper is due.

• Learn from the assessments. Note strengths and weaknesses of student performance as you assess so you will know what you may need to reteach or review.

• Create a safe environment for risk taking. Try new approaches and let your students see you trying something new, asking for their cooperation and feedback, admitting when something doesn't work and assessing why--involving students in the process and communicating the value of creative problem solving. Acknowledge and reward their efforts at challenging the status quo, even when any idea doesn't work (they still need honest critical feedback) but encouragement to explore options.

• Incorporate experiential learning activities. For example, consider how you might use high-impact practices in your courses.

• Use technology strategically. Select tools that advance your learning outcomes during and outside of class meetings. See more below.

Having taught communication courses at a Tier One University for 35+ years, I have experienced much change regarding the discipline of writing instruction--changes brought about by differences in the students taking the course as well as changes in what graduates are expected to know as they enter the workplace or prepare for post-graduage work. Adjusting to these has begun with assessing my course, my students, and my teaching (described in more detail below) and relies on the learning outcomes that my teaching must support. In the case of the engineering communication course that I taught in the department of Chemical Engineering, the learning outcomes included those created by ABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology). Thus, I used the ABET learning outcomes to direct course development and assess learning. With other courses I have taught, for example, a First-Year Seminar, I used the TAMU learning outcomes for undergraduates to develop and deliver the course. Mapping the course to the outcomes demonstrated a commitment to targeting the key elements (and scope) addressed by the accrediting body or the institution. The CHEN 301 Course Outcome Map connected the ABET communication outcomes to course assessments. In addition to using these outcomes to direct course development, I also consulted with current industry leaders when possible and to learn what they consider important to communication instruction in order to prepare our students for the challenges they should expect to encounter post graduation. Please visit my blog Rhetorical Musings and posts SBM Offshore: What Your Resume Must Show, Got Data? and No Templates Allowed, which discuss what I learned from engineers about writing instruction. Regarding assessment within the outcomes, I relied on using reflections at different points in the learning process: to preview or introduce a topic, review learning or connect outcomes to past or upcoming outcomes, and to assess if and how well students "own" the topic--how well they can articulate in their own words the value of what they have learned.

For the past 7 years I have taught a 1-hour zero-credit course at the Bush School: BUSH 602—Writing for the Medal of Excellence. Student learning outcomes include applying writing principles (document development, organization and design, executive summary, high-impact writing style, etc.) demonstrated through the reflective essays and a project proposal memo with a competency map, writing assignments required for the Medal of Excellence. Participants in the course have included both first- and second-year students in the INTA, PSAA, and EMPSA programs. However, the 2021 section included 15 students, 14 from the INTA degree program and 1 from the MIP degree program.

Learning outcomes include that students will be able to

1. Demonstrate competencies developed within the his or her degree program, which are documented in an ePortfolio meeting some of the Medal of Excellence requirements.

2. Write clear and coherent reflections, documenting where, how, and when learning has occurred and to what to degree learning is transferable to new contexts.

3. Apply best practices for online writing, including the establishment of privacy levels best suited for his or her intended career path.

4. Revise written work that demonstrates strong editing skills.

The reflective nature of the course assignments and instruction linked to the development of an integrative learning portfolio qualify the course as a high-impact experience. The goal of this course, along with the Medal of Excellence, includes transformed students, students who have a deeper understanding of the attributes required of public servants and of their own progress (i.e., self awareness) toward developing those attributes.

I believe that modeling what professionalism looks like through what I do and how I write is essential in several ways: It increases my accountability; it inspires me to continue learning about my profession (especially in the areas of technology), which not only keeps me current but communicates to students the value of lifelong learning as they see their instructor as a "learner"; last, it clearly communicates what I expect from my students, which takes some of the guess work out of their assignment preparation.