Corporate U survey

Okay, ladies, I would like your opinion. I have done some preliminary research of online CU consultant websites to get an idea of what their writing courses are like. Here's my criteria:
In order to get a glimpse of what is actually being taught in the corporate university classroom, I conducted an examination of seven corporate university consulting firms. The areas of focus for my study included:
 Types of writing classes
 Length/ Number of said courses
 Course content
 Method of delivery
 Type of Provider (non-academic consultant, university/academic courses)

The criteria used to choose which business writing consultant program would be included in the study included:
 The firms must serve at least one major corporation (consisting of 500 or more employees)

 The firm must serve a variety of industries (industrial, retail, etc.)

 The firm must have a website that contains information about the writing courses offered.

MY QUESTIONS TO YOU
1. I used this just to narrow my search, but maybe I should use other criteria?
2. How should I present these results? In other words, when I show this information during our presentations, what will make the most sense to you? I am not mathematician, and since I opted out of my statistics class for my Master's, I have no idea how to present this -- shorthand-- in a way that makes sense. HELP!! Here's just a bit of what I've gathered so far --I think I've found some interesting things-- I'll include them here, but be warned: It is RAW!

Online Research of Seven CU consulting Firms that design writing curriculum.

-- 3 of the "firms" are actually university or community college departments that were created to handle this market.

--The rest (4) are independent consultants -- not affiliated with a college.

-- The industries served by the seven firms are accounting/business services/legal, banking/financial, computing/technology, education, energy/utilities, engineering/R&D/science, entertainment, hospitality, government, health care, manufacturing, pharmaceutical, publishing/communications, real estate, retail/wholesale, transportation.

--Types of courses
The type of writing course offered the most is the basic grammar skills course: All seven firms offered this course. Two of the academic firms offer between 7 and 10 courses such as:
 Advanced Grant Proposal Writing
 Business Writing Skills
 Business& Marketing Skills
 Fundamentals of Technical Writing
 Intro to Internet Writing Markets
 Mastering Writing Skills
 Sharpen Business Writing Skills AMA
 Newsletter Design
 Editing and Publishing
 International Business Communication

One of the non-academic firms offers 28 courses for employees, which focus on
 Basic Grammar for Business
 Basic Writing Skills Tutorial
 Review of Common ESL Problems
 Individualized Writing for Non-native Speakers of English
 Business Writing Skills
 Recording and Writing Meeting Minutes
 Basic Grammar and Writing Skills for Business
 Polishing and Proofreading Your Business Writing
 Comprehensive Understanding of English Usage
 Writing Effective Business Letters
 Writing Effective Sales Letters
 Writing Effective Workplace E-mail
 Writing Successful Business Proposals
 Editing Skills
 Business Research Report Writing Skills
 Technical Writing
 Writing Clear, Objective Audit reports
 Grant-Writing skills
 Proofreading Skills
 Public Relations and Copywriting Skills
 Writing Computer User Manuals and System Documentation
 Plain English Writing Skills
 Legal Proofreading Skills
 Legal Writing Skills
 Writing Skills for Technical Support Center Representatives
 Individualized Writing Course
 Writing Coaching for Executives and Managers

What ever shall I do?

Writing about Writing: My Lit Review Woes

I hated my first lit review for this project. It was disjointed. It was awful. I can't stand to read it without skipping to the end. It seemed I couldn't rein in the herd of CU research possibilities. they were everywhere: stampeding all about, crapping on my shoes, keeping me up all night with that infernal mooing...okay, maybe it wasn't that bad. Still, the issue of education, learning, knowledge, and who does it BETTER becomes quite complex when it comes to the issue of learning on the job. In many ways, the university has turned its face to the corporate sun and seems to gain its strength from it. Yet, the university complains of the burns it receives from getting too close to the corporate mindset. Conversely, the company store expects the best of the "stock" that universities can produce, but they insist upon development programs that devalue the characteristics which makes that stock valuable. At the time of my first attempt at a review, I was afraid to approach this issue -- not because of the controversy (I live for controversy) but because I didn't know how or if I should reduce this to a research question for my project.

Now, I know it wouldn't make any sense to do the project unless this question is included.

So, my second try at a lit review began, and I attempted this question. So far, it seems okay. You let me know what you think about it.

More Corporate University Stuff

So, how does the corporate university relate to the issue of business writing? In addition to it being my preferred area of study, it is the skill (albeit a neglected one) through which organizations inform, persuade, organize, describe, and convey corporate strength.

Out of all the research I’ve gone through so far (which – surprisingly- does not include much in terms of writing on the job), Barbara Couture’s research, as presented in the article, “Categorizing Professional Discourse: Engineering, Administrative, and Technical Writing,” has been the most informative. Her study identifies three prominent functions of written organizational discourse: Engineering Writing, Administrative Writing, and Technical/Professional Writing. Here’s a synopsis of what she says.

Engineering writing is most often used by the scientific arm of an organization to convey knowledge and scientific authority, and is constrained by two sets of opposing values: 1) scientific objectivity versus professional judgment, and 2) corporate authority versus public responsibility. According to Couture, engineering writers, in general, are guided by four moral imperatives: universalism, disinterestedness, organized skepticism, and conflict.

Administrative Writing is the most pervasive writing style because it reflects the pragmatic functions of the organization in its struggle for identity, recognition, and market share. Two constraints shape administrative prose: 1) loyal attachment to corporate identity, and 2) risk-taking drive to assert power through individual decisions. Most of the in-house communications follow the administrative form, as do some of the letters, e-mail, and other utilitarian forms of external correspondence. Couture describes administrative prose as “jargon-ridden,” “abstract,” filled with “passive constructions”, and are replete with the use of the corporate “we.”

Technical / Professional Writing is defined by career writers’ perspectives on effective written communication, and by rhetoricians’ perspectives on the role of the writer in organizational contexts; and is characterized by a writer who is highly motivated to attend to matters of effective and readable writing style, and who value the rhetorical principles of audience analysis as well as strategies of persuasion and teaching. These writers also consider expertise in language skills, grammar, and mechanics of primary importance. This group – more than any other – requires research and analytical skills, and teamwork and project management skills. It is essential to note that these writers begin employment with the requisite skills needed to perform this writing because they are expected to accommodate a variety of working situations, assess the requirements of the situations, and meet all communication needs that arise. Perhaps, it is no surprise that technical / professional writers are more willing than the other groups to identify with corporate goals by repeating the corporate “we” in written works.

The issue that resonates with me most is the idea of employee/student identity vs. corporate alignment. Couture shows the use of the “we” in business writing as a representation of the removal of employee identity. Higher Education argues that by teaching critical thinking strategies, expressive writing assignments, and other academic methods, universities produce individuals who are able to enter and change existing mindsets of various discourse communities. Both systems claim to benefit the employee/student. Yet, as far as I can tell, no research exists that examines the types of courses taught by corporate universities, nor has any information been published that investigates the pedagogy [ies] of corporate university writing instruction. My research for this class will include the beginnings of this research. I will also include a plan for researching the larger issue of identity and corporate university instruction.

Research blog Post #1

CU Research Blog #1

Okay. This is the first installment of my thoughts about Corporate Universities and the research I plan to conduct. I have some information about Corporate Universities from a Masters Program group project that I did (with others) a few years ago. The group work evaluated Owens Corning’s CU burgeoning program in its broadest sense, but I found some articles about CU instruction versus higher education. Now, I would like to explore writing instruction programs and packages designed for corporate universities. I know I told you guys some of this information last week via discussion board, but I have since found some information that may help develop a theoretical basis for my research.

To recap, corporate universities are “work-based schools” created by corporations and consultants to increase professional and –for some companies—personal development of employees. Corporate-speak define the CU this way:
“[Corporate Universities] are strategic umbrella[s] for developing and educating employees to meet the organization’s business needs.”

The average CU offers traditional human resource-type training to enhance specific jobs skills and strengthen current performance, as well as offer courses that impart knowledge, skills and other characteristics intended to help employees move to positions that will increase the organizations competitive edge. Those who support CUs believe this “system” is the most fluid and successful method to enhance the skills of the workforce, which, in turn, increases the strength of organizations. Many employers are looking to expanding the training ideal to offer college-style courses that are tailored to an individual organization. Some work with traditional universities, others hire consultants to create a program with classes that may qualify for accreditation. Employers are diverting funds formerly set aside for employees who return to college for degrees to their own training and development programs. As a result, universities are losing these students (and the accompanying funds) to corporations.

But here’s the flip side. Henry Giroux, respected postmodern scholar, and critical pedagogy theorist is one of many in academe who believes that “global business and its agents among university administration and faculty are working to privatize public education and, among other things, marginalize critical practices that question the priority of profit in contemporary society.” Here’s a snippet from Giroux’s “The Corporate War against Higher Education”:

Culture in the corporate model becomes an all-encompassing horizon for producing market identities, values, and practices…public spheres are replaced by commercial spheres as the substance of critical democracy is emptied out and replaced by a democracy of goods, consumer styles, shopping malls, and the increasing expansion of the cultural and political power of corporation throughout the world. As a result of the corporate takeover of public life, the maintenance of democratic public spheres from which to organize the energies of a moral vision loses all relevance. As the power of the state and civil society are reduced in their ability to impose or make corporate power accountable, politics as an expression of democratic struggle is deflated, and it becomes more difficult within the logic of self-help and the bottom-line to address pressing social and moral issues in systemic and political terms.

Although this may sound a bit cerebral, it comes to the heart of why we teach (or our “lollipop dreams” about why we teach. Whichever works best for you.) Those in higher education who believe we teach to encourage independent thought and moral and civic responsibility feel that CUs will eventually taint this mission and create a consumer community devoid of the critical mindset.

Alright. I’m not trying to prove or disprove these arguments with my research at this point. The stuff I wrote above only gives us the deep background for research that could not possibly be covered during a semester, but that could be dissertation fodder. I don’t know.

What I want to do within this semester is evaluate online CU designers’ course offerings in writing. As far as I can tell, no one has done this yet. So, since research shows that Corporate-driven education will soon have more students than traditional universities, I think some reconnaissance is in order. I’m looking for types of courses offered (are they product driven or process? Post process? Collaborative?) , explicit teaching pedagogy, if present, and promised results. I’m investigating the websites of CU designers in order to get the most information I can in a short period. Later, I would like to follow a few employees who take corporate sponsored writing courses and record their experiences and results. To me, there really isn’t a way for me to answer deeper questions until the basic ones are answered. Since I haven’t found any other research in this area (yet) I will begin at the beginning!

Tell me what you think. Do you see a more fruitful angle that I should take? Does it sound as if I’m trying to do too much? Is my theoretical base too broad? To controversial? Any suggestions and or criticisms are welcome. You may make me cry and reconsider my life-path in Rhetoric, but don’t blame yourself! (You know I’m joking here, right?) All opinions are welcome!

Ain't I a woman?!?

Hello,

I'm AnDrea. I like walks on the beaches and hot sunny nights. Actually, I hate warm weather. I'm not sure what else I'm supposed to say here. I'm married with three kids. We have a house, 2 cars, and a dog named Murphy. I like Murphy. I'm studying RC (but so are you ) and I have no idea what my dissertation will be or when I'll graduate. I do plan to leave - one day. (By the way, did you catch the "hot sunny NIGHTS?).