This special issue of Programmatic Perspectives celebrates and highlights the unique stakeholder collaborations our programs foster and embrace. Specifically, we call for research and program showcase articles that illustrate collaboration models with stakeholders for various programmatic development.
Dr. Amber Lancaster, Oregon Tech
Dr. Susan Rauch, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
Dr. Carie S. T. King, The University of Texas at Dallas
Recent publications in Programmatic Perspectives have highlighted our field’s need to collaborate widely with stakeholders for programmatic purposes. In fact, the word “stakeholder” appears over 450 times—in every archived issue of Programmatic Perspectives since 2009, with 80% of references since 2015. This increasing focus on stakeholder collaboration draws attention to our field’s unique and growing perspectives to engage with people in and affected by our programs.
Technical, scientific, and professional communication programs engage in stakeholder collaboration, perhaps considerably more than other university programs due to the interdisciplinary nature of our field. Our programs serve across universities, and we engage with industry advisory boards, accreditation bodies, industry research partners, industry sponsors of program labs, internship/externships partners, experiential learning partners, and diverse student populations. Despite our field’s years of stakeholder collaborations and the growing focus on such practices, our primary journals have not published a special issue dedicated to stakeholder collaborations, although we do see related special-issue topics on entrepreneurship in TC programs in Journal of Business and Technical Communication (Fraiberg, 2021; Spinuzzi, 2017) and IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication (Spinuzzi, 2016).
Existing literature on stakeholder collaborations certainly do exist, and they emphasize how our programs engage with stakeholders, but collaboration models specifically are not the focus. Articles from Programmatic Perspectives have focused on collaboration with stakeholders to develop technical, scientific, and professional communication programs at both the undergraduate and graduate levels (Balzhiser, Sawyer, Womack-Smith, Smith, 2015; McKee, 2016; Seigel & Brady, 2020; Steiner, McCracken, & Moeller, 2020). We also see articles on stakeholder collaboration in specialized areas such as program assessment (Coppola, Elliot, & Newsham, 2016; Say, 2015; Vealey & Hyde, 2015); internship coordination (Kramer-Simpson, 2018a; Sides, 2015); usability/media lab and workspace design and sponsorship (Ferguson Nardone, Strubberg, & Blackburne, 2020; Howard, 2015; Kowalewski & Williamson, 2016); industry advisory boards (Spartz & Watts, 2016); service course curriculum (Ballard, 2018; Schreiber, Carrion, & Lauer, 2018); international partnerships (Ding, 2020); and reflective and responsive program and curricular changes to social needs, to name a few (e.g., social justice by Walton, Colton, Wheatley-Boxx, & Gurko, 2016; social media by Lam, Hannah, & Friess, 2016; implications of the year 2020 by Eisenhart & Gulbrandsen, 2020; Coffey, Glotfelter, & Simmons, 2020; digital literacy pedagogy, Burnham & Tham, 2021).
In the past 10 years, other publications on technical, scientific, and professional communication program development echo many of these topics. Our field’s scholarship emphasizes stakeholder involvement in designing client-based projects and partnerships (Getto & Beecher, 2016; Lancaster & Yeats, 2016; Kramer-Simpson, Newmark, & Ford, 2015); curriculum and course materials (Carnegie & Crane, 2019; Oswal & Melonçon, 2017); internships (Bourelle, 2014; Kramer-Simpson, 2018b); program learning outcomes and assessment strategies (Clegg, Lauer, Phelps & Melonçon, 2021; Kinash, McGillivray & Crane, 2017); and research (Melonçon, Rosselot-Merritt, & St. Amant, 2020). A recent book dedicated to industry-academic partnerships (Bridgeford & St. Amant, 2017) also highlights related topics: program development (Nugent & José, 2017; Spartz & Weber, 2017), internships, mentorships, and professional partnerships (Katz, 2017; Smith, 2017), usability labs and collaborative spaces (Howard, 2017), and research partnerships (Bernhardt, 2017), to name a few.
Special Issue Focus
This special issue focuses on collaboration models (i.e., passive/active models, user-centered models, team/community/network models, process/outcomes models, etc.) used to engage and design with stakeholders of our programs. In academia, we see “design” as a fundamental aspect to all areas of programmatic development: curriculum design, assessment, growth and sustainability (recruitment and retention of faculty and students), job-readiness, and student experience.
We seek original research or literature review articles and program showcase studies with focus on collaboration models and stakeholder involvement on topics listed in the CPTSC Submission Guidelines.
Questions to Consider
Proposed articles should answer one or more of the following questions:
- How do program administrators and faculty in technical, scientific, professional communication collaborate with stakeholders to design, grow, and assess their programs?
- What collaboration models are used to represent stakeholders’ voices in programmatic development? How successful or unsuccessful have such models been to achieve co-creation/co-ownership of programs, curricula, and the student experience?
- How do program administrators achieve balance in decision making (or prioritize decisions) that represents the broad, and often competing, stakeholder needs?
- How have faculty collaborated with stakeholders to develop new curricula in response to society and industry needs?
- What new or innovative approaches exist to leverage the value of stakeholder involvement?
- What barriers and/or limitations exist that pose challenges to stakeholder collaborations in programmatic development?
Construct a cover page with author name(s), institutional affiliation(s), and email address(es) and a separate document with a 500-word proposal. (References do not count towards the word count.) File types accepted include DOCX, DOC, or RTF. (No PDFs please.)
Submit proposal via email as attachment with subject line “Proposal: Collaboration Models for Programmatic Development: Stakeholder Engagement in Program Design, Growth, and Assessment” to lead Co-editor at both Amber.Lancaster@OIT.edu and email@example.com by February 25, 2022, 11:59 pm PST.
Submissions should conform to the Programmatic Perspectives Style Guide.
- February 25, 2022 – 500-word proposal abstracts due
- March 15, 2022 – Decisions on proposals sent to submitters
- April 30, 2022 – Initial manuscripts due
- May 30, 2022 – Blind reviewer comments sent to authors
- July 15, 2022 – Revised manuscripts due
- August 1, 2022 – Editorial feedback to contributors
- October 1, 2022 – Final manuscripts due
- November 30, 2022 – Publication of special issue
Ballard, Thomas. (2018). Cross-disciplinary perspectives on technical Communication: STEM faculty as stakeholders in the technical communication service course. Programmatic Perspectives, 10(2), 47–70.
Balzhiser, Deb, Sawyer, Paul, Womack-Smith, Shen, & Smith, J. A. (2015). Participatory design research for curriculum development of graduate programs for workplace professionals. Programmatic Perspectives. 7(2), 79–133.
Bernhardt, Stephen. (2017). Research agendas for technical and professional communication programs. In T. Bridgeford & K. St. Amant (Eds.), Academy-industry relationships and partnerships: Perspectives for technical communicators (pp. 197–212). Routledge.
Bourelle, Tiffany. (2014). New perspectives on the technical communication internship: Professionalism in the workplace. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 44(2), 171–189.
Bridgeford, Tracy, & St. Amant, Kirk. (Eds.). (2017). Academy-industry relationships and partnerships: Perspectives for technical communicators. Routledge.
Burnham, Kenyan, & Tham, Jason. (2021). Developing digital literacy through multi-institution collaboration and technology partnership: An analysis of assignments, student responses, and instructor reflections. Programmatic Perspectives, 12(2), 59–100.
Carnegie, Teena, & Crane, Kate. (2019). Responsive curriculum change: Going beyond occupation demands. Communication Design Quarterly Review, 6(3), 25–31.
Clegg, Geoffrey, Lauer, Jessica, Phelps, Johanna, & Melonçon, Lisa. (2021). Programmatic outcomes in undergraduate technical and professional communication programs. Technical Communication Quarterly, 30(1), 19–33.
Coffey, Kathleen, Glotfelter, Angela, & Simmons, Michele. (2020). Dynamically responsive programmatic design: A framework for identifying pressures for change. Programmatic Perspectives, 11(2), 138–165.
Coppola, Nancy, Elliot, Norbert, & Newsham, Faye. (2016). Programmatic research in technical communication: An interpretive framework for writing program assessment. Programmatic Perspectives. 8(2), 5–45.
Ding, Huiling. (2020). Building international partnerships: Challenges, lessons, and best practices in building accelerated BA-MS 3+2 joint degree programs. Programmatic Perspectives,11(1), 88–108.
Eisenhart, Chris, & Gulbrandsen, Karen. (2020). Embracing efficiency: Using program design and assessment to face tough times. Programmatic Perspectives, 11(1), 68–87.
Ferguson Nardone, Carroll, Strubberg, Brandon, & Blackburne, Brian. (2020). Complementing the classroom: building productive spaces for technical and professional communication. Programmatic Perspectives, 11(2), 113–137.
Fraiberg, Steven. (Ed.) (2021). Innovation and Entrepreneurship Communication in the Context of Globalization. Journal of Business and Technical Communication. 35(2).
Getto, Guiseppe, & Beecher, Fred. (2016). Toward a model of UX education: Training UX designers within the academy. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 59(2), 153–164.
Howard, Tharon. (2015). Building usability and user-experience testing facilities in professional and technical communication programs. Programmatic Perspectives. 7(2), 134–151.
Howard, Tharon. (2017). Accommodationist and constructivist approaches to academic-industry partnerships in a usability and user-experience facility. In T. Bridgeford & K. St. Amant (Eds.), Academy-industry relationships and partnerships: Perspectives for technical communicators (pp. 157–178). Routledge.
Katz, Susan. (2017). Creating bridges with internships. In T. Bridgeford & K. St. Amant (Eds.), Academy-industry relationships and partnerships: Perspectives for technical communicators (pp. 77–96). Routledge.
Kinash, Shelley, McGillivray, Laura, & Crane, Linda. (2017). Do university students, alumni, educators and employers link assessment and graduate employability? Higher Education Research & Development, 37(2), 301–315.
Kowalewski, Scott, & Williamson, Bill. (2016). Strategic assessment and usability studies: Tracing the evolution of identity and community engagement in an undergraduate professional and technical writing program. Programmatic Perspectives, 8(2), 96–118.
Kramer-Simpson, Elisabeth. (2018a). Matching Technical and Professional Communication Students with Internships. Programmatic Perspectives, 10(2), 100–124
Kramer-Simpson, Elisabeth. (2018b). Moving from student to professional: Industry mentors and academic internship coordinators supporting intern learning in the workplace. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 48(1), 81–103.
Kramer-Simpson, Elisabeth, Newmark, Julianne, & Ford, Julie Dyke. (2015). Learning beyond the classroom and textbook: Client projects’ role in helping students transition from school to work. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 58(1), 106–122.
Lam, Chris, Hannah, Mark, & Friess, Erin. (2016). Connecting programmatic research with social media: Using data from Twitter to inform programmatic decisions. Programmatic Perspectives, 8(2), 47–71.
Lancaster, Amber, & Yeats, Dave. (2016). Establishing Academic-Industry Partnerships: A Transdisciplinary Research Model for Distributed Usability Testing. International Journal of Sociotechnology and Knowledge Development (IJSKD), 8(3), 29–45.
McKee, Heidi. (2016). Researching a new professional writing major: Miami University. Programmatic Perspectives, 8(2), 142–162.
Melonçon, Lisa, Rosselot-Merritt, Jeremy, & St. Amant, Kirk. (2020). A field-wide metasynthesis of pedagogical research in technical and professional communication. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 50(1), 91–118.
Nugent, Jim, & José, Laurence. (2017). Stakeholder theory and technical communication academic programs. In T. Bridgeford & K. St. Amant (Eds.), Academy-industry relationships and partnerships: Perspectives for technical communicators (pp. 11–30). Routledge.
Oswal, Sushil, & Melonçon, Lisa. (2017). Saying No to the Checklist: Shifting from an Ideology of Normalcy to an Ideology of Inclusion in Online Writing Instruction. WPA: Writing Program Administration-Journal of the Council of Writing Program Administrators, 40(3). 61–77.
Say, Brett. (2015). Developing learning outcomes in professional writing and technical communication programs: Obstacles, benefits, and potential for graduate program improvement. Programmatic Perspectives. 7(2), 25–49.
Schreiber, Joanna, Carrion, Melissa, & Lauer, Jessica. (Eds.). (2018). Revisiting the service course to map out the future of the field [Special issue]. Programmatic Perspectives, 10(1).
Seigel, Marika, & Brady, Ann. (2020). The interdisciplinary arc: One program’s story. Programmatic Perspectives, 11(1), 109–128.
Sides, Charles. (2015). Internships: Past, Present, and Future. Programmatic Perspectives, 7(1), 67–86.
Smith, Herb. (2017). Collaborating with industry using mentoring programs and internships. In T. Bridgeford & K. St. Amant (Eds.), Academy-industry relationships and partnerships: Perspectives for technical communicators (pp. 97–116). Routledge.
Spartz, John, & Watts, Julie. (2016). Towards a participatory action research model for extending programmatic assessment with industry advisory boards. Programmatic Perspectives, 8(2), 163–185.
Spartz, John, & Weber, Ryan. (2017). A technical communication venture in building academic-entrepreneur relations and partnerships. In T. Bridgeford & K. St. Amant (Eds.), Academy-industry relationships and partnerships: Perspectives for technical communicators (pp. 31–54). Routledge.
Spinuzzi, Clay. (Ed.) (2016). Entrepreneurship communication [Special issue]. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication. 59(4).
Spinuzzi, Clay. (Ed.) (2017). Rhetoric of entrepreneurship: Theories, methodologies, and practices [Special issue]. Journal of Business and Technical Communication. 31(3).
Steiner, Lindsay, McCracken, Chris, & Moeller, Marie. (2020). The minor is major: An adhocratic, relationship-based view of TPC curriculum and curriculum revision. Programmatic Perspectives,11(2), 94–112.
Vealey, Kyle, & Hyde, Charlotte. (2015). Extending Participatory Assessment to STEM, Community, and Industry Stakeholders: Rhetorical Work and Ethical Considerations. Programmatic Perspectives. 7(2), 4–24.
Walton, Rebecca, Colton, Jared, Wheatley-Boxx, Rikki, & Gurko, Krista. (2016). Social justice across the curriculum: Research-based course design. Programmatic Perspectives, 8(2), 119–141.
GUEST EDITORS’ BIOGRAPHIES
Dr. Amber Lancaster is an Associate Professor of Communication and Director of Professional Writing (PWR) at Oregon Tech. Amber leads a variety of program tasks including program marketing efforts, student recruitment, industry partnerships, internship coordinator, and usability lab administration. Her publications include manuscripts on usability/UX, transdisciplinary research models in UX, and ethics. Her research focuses on the intersections of user centered design (UCD), ethics, and social issues as well as on technology and writing pedagogy. Current research includes a grant-funded project for programmatic development; engagement with professional writing students to co-create/co-design media messages for diverse stakeholders; and usability testing media messages for diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Dr. Susan Rauch is an Assistant Professor of Humanities and Communication at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Prescott, Arizona. Susan oversees the technical report writing course workgroup at ERAU, which evaluates the equivalency and equity of course teaching materials and curriculum. She serves on several committees for Writing Center Program development and the ERAU Writing Matters initiative Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) to meet SACSCOC accreditation. She is also a former program and curriculum coordinator for the first-year Science Communication program and course across two campuses at Massey University in New Zealand, and as an instructor at Texas Tech University, she participated in the programmatic assessment of the second-year technical writing course. Current research includes grant-funded projects for programmatic development and for user tests multimodal online storytelling platforms as interactive reporting tools in health and science communication as well as the development of OER course curriculum in technical writing.
Dr. Carie S. T. King is a Clinical Professor and Associate Director of Rhetoric at The University of Texas at Dallas. In addition to the first-year writing program, Carie leads the University’s Committee for Academic Integrity. Last year, she was Co-I of UT System Innovative Curriculum Development Grant, which supported programs and funded the collaborative creation (for UT Dallas and UT Arlington) of a simulated learning experience in core technical-communication courses. Her teaching covers PTC in engineering as well as communication, ethics, and STEM writing, and her research focuses on pedagogy and intercultural communication. Her publications include a monograph, The Rhetoric of Breast Cancer, and collaborative works in communication and pedagogy. She is Co-founder and VP of a communication consulting firm.