Deliverables

If you used GenAI to complete any deliverable, you must submit a Metacognitive Report alongside your assignment. For exercises 1–3, that report can be as concise as 250 words. For the Creative Challenge, the report should be more substantive because it should summarize how you used GenAI across the exercises leading up to it as well as during the Creative Challenge itself, reflect on the key decisions you made independently to preserve your own voice and judgment, and explain how your use of GenAI evolved across the module. (See Metacognitive Report guidelines below.)

Learning Outcomes

By completing this project, students

1. understand how to engage in rhetorical and stylistic analysis to assess the authority of research journals, articles, and research claims.
2. understand the topics, research questions, and stylistic values of a premier journal in professional and technical writing
3. understand what constitutes a valid research question or scholarly debate in one top-tier, PTC journals

Introduction to the Assignment

This multi-part project introduces you to rhetorical and stylistic analysis as both a method of inquiry and a way of joining the conversation in Professional and Technical Communication (PTC). In the first stage, you’ll define the principles of rhetorical and stylistic analysis by studying how writers construct authority, credibility, and professional style. Next, you’ll apply those principles to two leading journals in the field—Journal of Business and Technical Communication (JBTC) and Technical Communication Quarterly (TCQ)—to see how researchers communicate ideas, establish credibility, and reflect shared values through tone, structure, and design. Finally, you’ll synthesize what you’ve learned in a creative capstone that develops a portrait of the PTC field and reflects on your own process of learning to read, analyze, and think like a researcher. Together, these steps mark your first sustained entry into the scholarly conversation of PTC

Who Are Professional and Technical Communicators?

Professional and technical writers are subject matter experts in writing, design, usability, information architecture, documentation, project management, and digital writing — including, e.g., remediating texts in multiple media, printed posters to Tweets.

They are practitioners, theorists, and researchers who investigate, create, and deliver clear, accessible content for diverse audiences across industries such as technology, healthcare, finance, and government. As researchers, professional and technical writers may investigate user behaviors, analyze document effectiveness, conduct literature reviews, or explore new communication technologies. They often collaborate with subject matter experts outside of their field, serving as writing coaches, editors, and project managers who engage in research to enhance communication strategies and outcomes.

Professional writers may do the equivalent work of technical writers — and vice versa — but traditionally there are a few distinctions between these roles:

• Professional Writers are typically skilled writers, public speakers, and researchers. They often hold undergraduate or graduate degrees in fields such as rhetoric, composition, communication, design, and product management, though some acquire these competencies through on-the-job experience. These professionals may serve as writers or spokespersons on teams, bringing their communication expertise to various subject areas. Their work can be job-related or extend to public spaces, including social media platforms like Reddit, blogs, newspaper and magazine articles, and books.
• Technical Writers share many of the skills and credentials of Professional Communicators but tend to focus on complex, technical subjects in fields like technology, engineering, and science. While they may have similar academic backgrounds to professional writers, their work is typically more specialized. Unlike Professional Communicators who often address broad public audiences, Technical Writers primarily create content for specific, often specialized audiences in workplace settings. Their outputs include instructional materials, user manuals, product documentation, and technical reports, with an emphasis on clarity, accuracy, and usability of information.

What is Rhetorical Analysis?

Rhetorical Analysis refers to the practice of analyzing a rhetorical situation. When applied to research, rhetorical analysis might involve:

1. Evaluating the Exigency: Examining the problem being investigated and questioning whether the investigators chose the most appropriate methods to analyze the problem.
2. Analyzing the Audience: Identifying who the audience is for the research and questioning whether the research question or argument addresses gaps in the literature and the current status of scholarly conversations on the topic. This involves identifying how the study interacts with canonical texts within the discipline or questioning how the study responds to current discussions and perspectives on the topic.
3. Assessing the Researchers: Determining whether the researchers have the qualifications and expertise necessary to conduct the study. This includes checking for ethical lapses and conflicts of interest. For example, if an investigator is researching tobacco and they work for a cigarette company, you would be wise to question the veracity of their review of literature, methods, claims, and results.
4. Analyzing the Journal: Recognizing that not all journals or publishing companies are equal, and understanding the reputation and rigor of the journal where the research is published.

What is Stylistic Analysis?

Stylistic analysis examines how a writers creates clarity, credibility, and usability through prose style, genre conventions, organization, and visuals. In this project you’ll use it to see how JBTC and TCQ articles make knowledge readable and trustworthy. Stylistic analysis may include

• Prose style: concision, sentence rhythm, jargon control, voice/stance (I/we vs. impersonal), hedging vs. confidence.
• Genre conventions of research articles: abstract → intro → literature review → methods → results → discussion → implications/limits (and where a journal bends this pattern).
• Organization: deductive openings (purpose upfront), headings hierarchy, paragraph length, signposting, scannability.
• Evidence display: quotations vs. paraphrase, integration of prior work, citation density and placement.
• Visual language: tables/figures, data visualizations, models/diagrams, captions, accessibility (alt-text cues, color/contrast), how visuals advance the argument.
• Design & page layout: typography, white space, lists, callouts—anything that improves readability and navigation.
• Ethos cues: disclosure statements, author bios/affiliations, limitations sections, reproducibility artifacts (appendices, data/code links).

Guidelines and Evaluation

Guidelines for a Summary and Synthesis of Readings

Purpose

This assignment defines key rhetorical concepts essential to knowledge workers—rhetoric, authorship, evidence, style, and authority—and helps you understand the role of the rhetor in developing clear, persuasive communication. You’ll explore how writers contribute to evolving scholarly conversations by engaging in rhetorical reasoning to determine whether and how to speak. Learn about the information literacy and design principles that shape credibility, clarity, and professionalism in Professional and Technical Communication (PTC).

Readings

To inform your analysis for the following assignments, read the following Writing Commons articles:

1. Professional and Technical Communication: An Overview
2. Rhetoric
   1. Rhetorical Analysis
   2. Rhetorical Reasoning
   3. Rhetorical Situation
   4. Rhetorical Knowledge
3. Credibility and Design
   1. Credibility and Authorial Authority – How to Develop Readers’ Trust and Respect
   2. Design – The Visual Language That Shapes Our World
   3. Design Principles – The Big Design Principles You Need to Know to Create Compelling Messages
   4. Page Design – How to Design Messages for Maximum Impact
4. Stylistic Analysis
   • Style – Why Is How You Say Something So Important?
   • The Elements of Style
   • How to Write for the Professional World – Guide to Professional and Business Writing
   • Academic Writing – How to Write for the Academic Community

Instructions

Write a 600–700-word synthesis that answers the following question:

• Write a summary and analysis of the key concepts addressed by these readings. Elaborate on how rhetorical knowledge, rhetorical reasoning, and style and design principles inform the making of knowledge and the establishment of authority in PTC?

Your synthesis should:

• Conclude by explaining why rhetorical awareness matters for evaluating professional and scholarly writing.
• Combine insights from multiple readings rather than summarize them one by one.
• Explain how rhetoric, authorship, evidence, style, and authority work together to produce persuasive and credible communication.
• Include at least three short quotes or paraphrases (with in-text attributions), using APA 7
• Organize your writing with clear headings (e.g., Rhetoric and Reasoning, Design and Style, Credibility and Authority).

Submission Instructions

• Include Word Count: [insert number] at the top.
• Upload your completed post to Canvas by the due date.

Evaluation Rubric (100 Points Total)

Criteria	Description	Points
Understanding	Accurately explains key rhetorical and stylistic concepts (rhetorical knowledge, reasoning, style, and authority).	40
Synthesis	Connects ideas across readings to explain how rhetoric and style shape credibility and knowledge-making in PTC.	30
Evidence	Uses at least three well-integrated quotes or paraphrases from the readings.	15
Clarity & Organization	Writing is coherent, well-structured, and follows format and length requirements.	15
Total	100 pts

---

Guidelines for a Rhetorical and Stylistic Analysis of JBTC (Journal of Business and Technical Communication)

Due: Consult Canvas for the due date
Format: Discussion Forum Post (≈ 750 words)
Value: 100 points

Purpose

In this assignment, you’ll apply the lens of rhetorical analysis to examine how researchers in the Journal of Business and Technical Communication (JBTC) establish credibility, communicate ideas clearly, and reflect the values of the PTC community. You’ll study three articles from JBTC to identify how authors respond to rhetorical situations—how they define problems, address audiences, use evidence, and adopt professional style and design conventions that make their work persuasive and credible.

Before You Begin

Before beginning this analysis, review your notes and key concepts from the previous assignment, “Summary and Synthesis of Readings.” Apply those rhetorical and stylistic principles—especially rhetorical reasoning, rhetorical situation, and professional style—to evaluate how authors in JBTC construct credibility and communicate research findings.

As you read, ask:

• What problem or exigency motivates this study?
• Who is the intended audience, and how does the author address them?
• What stylistic moves does the author(s) make? For instance, how do they employ visualizations, organize documents, or style sentences?
• What does the author’s tone, evidence, and design reveal about what JBTC values in good research?

Note: You do not need to analyze the authority of the citations/literature review or methods for this analysis.

Instructions

1. Explore the JBTC Website
   Visit the Journal of Business and Technical Communication (SAGE) homepage: <https://journals.sagepub.com/home/jbt>. Read the About/Aims and Scope, scan the Editorial Board, and review lists of Most Read, Most Cited, and Trending Articles. Note how the journal defines its purpose and audience and how it signals credibility through design, editorial leadership, and peer review.
   
2. Select Three Articles
   Choose one article from each list (Most Read, Most Cited, Trending). Read the titles, abstracts, introductions, reviews of literature, and author bios. You are not expected to read the full study.
   
3. Write and Post Your Discussion (≈ 750 words)
   • At the top of your post, include:
   • Word Count: [insert number]

Then insert a short table summarizing your three articles:

Article Title	In-Text Citation (APA 7)	Rhetorical Focus
Example: “Rethinking Collaboration in Distributed Teams”	(Lee & Adams, 2023)	Examines how digital collaboration changes authorship and credibility.
Example: “Design Thinking as Technical Communication”	(Patel, 2022)	Uses design as a rhetorical tool for problem-solving.
Example: “AI and the Ethics of Documentation”	(Hernandez, 2024)	Analyzes how tone and framing influence trust in automation.

Use the following headings to organize your post:

Introduction – Evaluate How Credibility Is Constructed
Begin by explaining how JBTC establishes itself as a credible, professional research publication. Draw on rhetorical reasoning to identify the signals of authority you observe—its publisher reputation, editorial leadership, peer-review process, and history of influence in the field.

REQUIRED: Include a clear five-star authority rating statement. You must explicitly state your numerical rating of JBTC’s authority. For example:

“Based on these criteria, I rate JBTC 5 out of 5 stars for authority because …. a, b, c. (Example: it demonstrates excellence in publisher reputation, editorial rigor, peer review standards, and sustained influence in the field.”

Homepage Analysis

Summarize what your rhetorical and stylistic analysis of the JBTC homepage reveals about the journal’s credibility, audience, and professional values. Consider how design, language, and organization communicate authority. Your analysis must succinctly address the following:

• Journal Overview and Metrics: What does this language reveal about the journal’s purpose and values?
• Editorial Board: How does the presentation of editors signal expertise, diversity, or disciplinary breadth?
• Layout and Design: How do visual choices (color, navigation, typography, white space) communicate professionalism?
• Article Categories (Most Read, Most Cited, Trending): What do these categories signal about influence, reader engagement, and the journal’s position in the field?

Article Analysis
Discuss how each of your three selected articles demonstrates rhetorical reasoning in action.

For each article, address the following:

• What problem or exigency does the article address?
• Who seems to be the intended audience, and how does the article engage them?
• How do tone, structure, and evidence establish credibility and professional ethos?
• What stylistic and design choices make the writing accessible and authoritative?

Author Credentials (REQUIRED):

You must identify the authors’ institutional affiliations and professional backgrounds. Look at the author bio listed as a hyperlink at top the article. Connect your observations to ideas from earlier readings—credibility, rhetorical situation, authority, and professional style.

Example:

“The lead author, Dr. Maria Santos, is an Associate Professor of Technical Communication at Northwestern University, which establishes her expertise in workplace communication research. Her co-author works in industry as a UX researcher at Google, bringing practitioner perspective to the study.”

Takeaway – Conclude with one or two insights about what your rhetorical and stylistic analysis suggests about how credibility and professionalism are represented in JBTC. Focus on what these examples illustrate about effective communication within this journal rather than generalizing to the entire field.

References – End with an APA 7 reference list for your three JBTC articles.

Upload your completed post to Canvas by the due date.
Note: No peer replies required.

Why This Matters

This assignment helps you evaluate how credibility functions in academic publishing and what “authority” looks like for PTC. By analyzing the homepage of JBTC and popular articles, you’ll better understand how scholarly and professional communication overlap in tone, evidence, and credibility.

Evaluation Rubric (100 Points Total)

Criteria	Description	Points
Authority Assessment (Intro)	Provides a clear five-star authority rating (explicitly stated as “I rate JBTC X out of 5 stars”) and justifies it using relevant criteria (publisher, editorial board, peer review, article influence, longevity).	20
Homepage Analysis	Identifies all four required rhetorical features of the homepage (About section, editorial board, layout/design, and article categories) and draws thoughtful conclusions about credibility and community values.	30
Article Analysis	Summarizes three articles accurately; identifies authors’ credentials and institutional affiliations; discusses topics and stylistic tendencies; connects findings to readings on authority and professional style.	30
Organization & Format	Includes word count, citation table, and APA 7 reference list with descriptive title; uses all required headings; maintains professional tone; meets word count and formatting requirements.	20
Total		100 pts

---

Guidelines for a Rhetorical and Stylistic Analysis of TCQ (Technical Communication Quarterly)

Due: Consult Canvas for the due date
Format: Discussion Forum Post (≈ 750 words)
Value: 100 points

This assignment uses the exact same structure, requirements, and rubric as your JBTC analysis. The only difference is the journal you’re analyzing: Technical Communication Quarterly (TCQ) <https://www.tandfonline.com/journals/htcq20>.

After JBTC, TCQ is widely recognized as the second most important journal in the discipline of Professional and Technical Communication. By analyzing TCQ using the same analytical framework you applied to JBTC, you’ll see another example of how a premier PTC journal establishes credibility and uses professional style to communicate research.

Why This Matters

This synthesis assignment helps you:

1. Recognize disciplinary patterns: You’ll see beyond individual articles to identify the rhetorical and stylistic patterns that define Professional and Technical Communication as a field.
2. Understand professional communication norms: By analyzing not only what PTC researchers study but also how they write and design their scholarship, you’ll internalize the stylistic conventions that characterize excellent work in this field.
3. Develop scholarly perspective: The ability to synthesize across multiple sources and identify gaps is essential for anyone who wants to contribute to scholarly conversations—whether through graduate research, professional publications, or workplace thought leadership.
4. See yourself in the conversation: By reviewing PTC scholarship you’ll be able to better pitch your own research project, which is a major project you’ll address later in the course.

---

Guidelines for Research at JBTC & TCQ

Due: Consult Canvas for the due date
Format: Discussion Forum Post (≈ 1000 to 1200 words, not including references or visualizations)
Value: 100 points

Note: No peer replies required.

Purpose

Now that you have completed rhetorical and stylistic analyses of both the Journal of Business and Technical Communication (JBTC) and Technical Communication Quarterly (TCQ), this assignment asks you to synthesize what you learned about the PTC methodological community—specifically, the research topics that interest this community, who publishes and writes this research, and how scholars shape their texts through visual and textual style.

Your goal is to create a portrait of PTC by identifying patterns across the scholarly work you and your peers analyzed. What topics do PTC researchers study? Who are these authors and what institutions do they represent? What writing and design choices characterize professional communication in this field?

Begin by reviewing the discussion forums on Canvas where your peers posted their rhetorical and stylistic analyses of articles from JBTC and TCQ.

You should assemble a corpus of 18 articles total, consisting of:

• Your previously analyzed articles:
  • 3 articles from JBTC
  • 3 articles from TCQ
• 12 additional articles drawn from JBTC and TCQ (6 from each journal)

Most students will find it efficient to select these 12 additional articles from peers’ existing analyses in the discussion forums. Doing so allows you to reuse article metadata (e.g., titles, authors, publication details) rather than reconstructing tables from scratch. You may draw from more than two peers if that helps you avoid overlap or broaden coverage.

Alternatively, you may select the 12 additional articles independently by reviewing the journals directly. This option is acceptable but requires more time and documentation.

Required Components

At the top of your post, include:

Word Count: [insert number] (not counting the table or references)

Summary Table (Major Component)

Create a comprehensive table documenting all articles you reviewed. This table should include approximately 18 rows (fewer if there’s overlap in article selection among you and your peers). The table is where you provide detailed article-level information. Your prose sections that follow should synthesize patterns across articles, not summarize individual articles one by one. Use first and last names for your peers. For your own articles, use “Self” or your own name in the Peer Name column.

Peer Name	Article (APA In-Text Citation)	Rhetorical Focus	Stylistic Features
Self	(Smith, 2023)	AI and workplace ethics in JBTC	Analytical tone; integrates visuals to clarify ethical frameworks
Jordan Alvarez	(Lee & Patel, 2022)	Usability testing in digital design (TCQ)	User-centered style; concise headings and plain-language reporting
Jordan Alvarez	(Chen, 2023)	Remote collaboration tools (JBTC)	Problem-solution structure; extensive use of screenshots
Taylor Brooks	(Hernandez, 2024)	Visual communication in healthcare (TCQ)	Multimodal approach; emphasizes image-text balance
[Continue for all ~24 articles]

4. Required Headings

Use the following headings to organize your post:

Introduction – Major Research Topics in PTC

Based on your table, identify and summarize the main research topics that appeared most frequently. Create a brief topic frequency analysis. For example:

Example: Research Topics Across 18 Articles:

• AI and ethics in technical communication (6 articles)
• Usability and user experience design (5 articles)
• Visual/multimodal communication (4 articles)
• Workplace collaboration and remote work (3 articles)
• Accessibility and social justice (4 articles)
• Pedagogy and teaching practices (2 articles)

Briefly discuss why these topics are significant and what they reveal about the community’s current interests. Do not summarize individual articles—identify themes.

Patterns and Insights – The PTC Community and Professional Style

Synthesize what these 18 articles reveal about the PTC community. Focus on patterns, not individual article summaries.

Consider:

• Who writes for these journals? What institutions are represented? What does this suggest about the geographic and institutional scope of PTC scholarship?
• What values do these topics and approaches suggest the community holds (ethics, usability, accessibility, social justice, workplace practice)?
• What stylistic patterns characterize professional writing in PTC (tone, use of visuals, organization, level of technicality, design conventions)?
• How do JBTC and TCQ differ in their emphases, writing conventions, or visual styles?

Connect these observations to what you learned about credibility, professional style, and rhetorical situation in your earlier readings.

Gaps and Next Steps – Emerging Topics

Identify one area that seems underrepresented or emerging based on your review of 24 articles.

Then consider:

• What makes this topic or approach less represented in current scholarship?
• Why might this gap or emerging area matter to the PTC community?
• What would studying this topic contribute to understanding professional and technical communication?

Takeaway – Portrait of the PTC Community

Conclude with one or two insights about what this snapshot of 24 articles from JBTC and TCQ reveals about:

• The research interests of the PTC community as reflected by the topics and research questions pursued in the topics you analyzed
• The professional and visual writing styles valued in this field
• The disciplinary identity and values of PTC scholars

What portrait emerges when you step back and look at who writes for these journals, what they write about, and how they communicate their ideas?

5. References

At the end of your post, include a Reference List in APA 7 format for all 18 articles mentioned in your table.

(The reference list is not included in your word count.)

6. Upload your completed assignment to Canvas by the due date.

Why This Matters

This assignment builds two essential literacies that extend far beyond this course:

• Rhetorical analysis makes you a more critical consumer of information. By learning to evaluate how authors establish credibility, frame problems, and use evidence, you develop the analytical skills needed to assess research quality, identify persuasive strategies, and make informed decisions based on what you read.

• Stylistic analysis makes you a more effective producer of information. By examining how professional writers craft clear, accessible, authoritative prose, you internalize the conventions that make your own communication credible and persuasive in academic and professional contexts.

This assignment prepares you for future assignments in this course:

• Module 2: Mapping scholarly conversations—research questions, literature reviews, and citation practices
• Module 3: Understanding epistemologies and methods that inform PTC research
• Module 4: Critiquing research design, evidence, and significance
• Module 5: Designing and proposing your own research

Understanding what stylistic and rhetorical choices characterize top-tier PTC scholarship gives you the foundation needed to analyze, critique, and eventually contribute to this scholarly community.

Evaluation Rubric (100 Points Total)

Criteria	Description	Points
Summary Table	Includes comprehensive table documenting approximately 18 articles. Accurate peer names, journals, article citations, and concise rhetorical focus and stylistic summaries for each entry.	25
Pattern Recognition & Synthesis	Clearly identifies and synthesizes recurring research topics and stylistic features across the full dataset. Shows ability to see beyond individual articles to community-level patterns. Identifies who publishes this research and from what institutions. Focuses on synthesis, not article-by-article summary.	25
Critical Insight	Explains what these patterns reveal about the PTC community’s interests, values, and professional communication practices. Makes meaningful connections to course concepts (credibility, rhetorical situation, professional style). Compares JBTC and TCQ where relevant.	25
Gaps & Emerging Topics	Identifies an underrepresented or emerging research area based on the 24-article dataset. Thoughtfully considers why this gap exists and what studying it might contribute to understanding PTC.	15
Organization & Format	Logical, polished writing with clear organization. Includes word count, complete summary table, all required headings, and APA 7 references for all 18 articles with descriptive title. Professional tone throughout. Meets word count requirements.	10
Total		100 pts

---

Guidelines for the Metacognitive Report

For detailed guidance, examples, and the complete list of legitimate AI roles, see Metacognitive Report – AI Writing Ethics: Balancing Agency, Voice & Disclosure.

Your report must include:

1. Header — Beneath your title, record left-justified:

• Word Count / Name / GenAI Tools Used / Chat Log Links

2. GenAI Usage Table(s) — One table per tool with these columns:

• Step in Writing Process (Prewriting, Drafting, Revising, etc.)
• Number of Chats
• Primary Purpose(s) (Thought Partner, Research Assistant, Teaching Assistant, etc.)
• Notes on Use (2–3 sentences: what you asked, what the AI gave you, and whether you accepted, revised, or rejected it — and why)

3. Critical Reflection (minimum 250 words) — Explain:

• Which roles AI played and why
• At least one moment where you rejected or corrected AI output
• How AI helped you learn something you then applied independently
• Where you made decisions AI could not make for you

Submission Guidelines

Upload your report along with your assignment to Canvas by the required due date.

Evaluation Rubric

Criterion	What Earns Full Points
Required components & specificity (header, table(s), chat logs, word count; concrete examples from every major assignment)	Everything present, accurate, and specific — no vague generalities
Critical analysis of agency, iteration, risks, & lessons learned — including explicit discussion of when and why you accepted chunks of AI-generated text, what you changed or kept, and what that choice reveals about your judgment as a writer	Clear references to required readings; honest discussion of how you stayed in control; accepted passages are identified and defended, not just mentioned
Clarity, organization, & authentic voice	Logical flow, concise sentences, error-free PDF; authentic voice evident — writing does not read as AI-generated