Curriculum Module SEI-CM-23
Technical Writing for Software Engineers Linda Levine Linda H. Pesante Susan B. Dunkle
November 1991
ABSTRACT — continued from page one, block 19
UNLIMITED, UNCLASSIFIED SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 1a. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
1b. RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS
Unclassified
None
2a. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION AUTHORITY
3. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY OF REPORT
N/A
Approved for Public Release Distribution Unlimited
2b. DECLASSIFICATION/DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE
N/A 4. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)
5. MONITORING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)
SEI-CM-23 6a. NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION
6b. OFFICE SYMBOL (if applicable)
Software Engineering Institute
SEI
7a. NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATION
SEI Joint Program Office
6c. ADDRESS (city, state, and zip code)
7b. ADDRESS (city, state, and zip code)
Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh PA 15213
HQ ESC/ENS 5 Eglin Street Hanscom AFB, MA 01731-2116
8a. NAME OFFUNDING/SPONSORING ORGANIZATION
8b. OFFICE SYMBOL (if applicable)
SEI Joint Program Office
ESC/ENS
9. PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
F1962890C0003
8c. ADDRESS (city, state, and zip code))
10. SOURCE OF FUNDING NOS.
Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh PA 15213
PROGRAM ELEMENT NO
PROJECT NO.
63756E
N/A
TASK NO
WORK UNIT NO.
N/A
N/A
11. TITLE (Include Security Classification)
Technical Writing for Software Engineers {Insert title line 2} {Insert title line 3} {Insert title line 4} 12. PERSONAL AUTHOR(S)
Linda Levine Linda H. Pesante Susan B. Dunkle 13a. TYPE OF REPORT
13b. TIME COVERED
14. DATE OF REPORT (year, month, day)
15. PAGE COUNT
Final
FROM
November 1991
75
TO
16. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTATION
17. COSATI CODES FIELD
18. SUBJECT TERMS (continue on reverse of necessary and identify by block number) GROUP
SUB. GR.
19. ABSTRACT (continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number)
This module, which was written specifically for software engineers, discusses writing in the context of software engineering. Its focus is on the basic problem-solving activities that underlie effective writing, many of which are similar to those underlying software development. The module draws on related work in a number of disciplines, including rhetorical theory, discourse analysis, linguistics, and document design. It suggests techniques for becoming an effective writer and offers criteria for evaluating writing.
(please turn over) 20. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY OF ABSTRACT UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED
SAME AS RPT
21. ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION DTIC USERS
Unclassified, Unlimited Distribution
22a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL
22b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (include area code)
22c. OFFICE SYMBOL
Thomas R. Miller, Lt Col, USAF
(412) 268-7631
ESC/ENS (SEI)
DD FORM 1473, 83 APR
EDITION of 1 JAN 73 IS OBSOLETE
UNLIMITED, UNCLASSIFIED SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE
76
Technical Writing for Software Engineers
SEI-CM-23
Young70 Young, Richard E., Becker, Alton L., and Pike, Kenneth L. Rhetoric: Discovery and Change. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1970. This unusual text reflects the interests of its authors, who come from three disciplines: rhetoric, anthropology, and linguistics. The discussions on inquiry (problem solving) and interpretation (shared expectations) reinforce the cognitive and cultural elements of language use. The book is known especially for its “tagmemic grid,” a heuristic based on viewing experiences as particles, waves, and fields.
Young80 Young, Richard E. “Arts, Crafts, Gifts, and Knacks: Some Disharmonies in the New Rhetoric.” Visible Language 14, 4 (1980), 341-350. This paper also appears in Reinventing the Rhetorical Tradition, ed. A. Freedman and I. Pringle, L&S Books for the Canadian Council of Teachers of English, 1980. A version is available as “Concepts of Art and the Teaching of Writing” in The Rhetorical Tradition and Modern Writing, ed. J. J. Murphy, New York: Modern Language Association of America, 1982. Young addresses the limitations, especially pedagogical, that come from seeing writing as mechanical/grammatical or magical. This is an interesting article to read with Hoare’s “Programming: Sorcery or Science?” [Hoare84]. Both Hoare and Young discuss the craftlike, magical, and scientific properties of these two activities—programming and writing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>DO LINE