Hi Marcy,
By epistemic writing, I mean writing that produces knowledge, initially for the writer, and then, sometimes (often I'd argue, for writing done in the workplace), for the reader. Epistemic writing deals more with Moffett's "generalizing" and "theorizing" than "recording" or "reporting" (though the latter may have epistemic dimensions). Epistemic business writing genres include recommendation reports, proposals, contracts, pharmaceutical trial documentation, briefing notes, policies, "outlook" reports, and RFPs - - any document, I would argue, in which the final content can't be predicted at the outset by the writer.
Businesses (most businesses) are "rational enterprises," to use Toulmin's expression. To be successful, a business must create, organize and apply various types of knowledge. A good deal of this (not all) is done in writing. Writing is a major vehicle in many businesses for regulating dissent, for establishing consensus, for assessing possibilities, and for promoting action - - i.e., writing is a machine for creating and validating knowledge and for constraining / encouraging rational action (i.e., applying knowledge) to further the business.
But now that I write this, I find myself puzzled at your puzzlement ("hard time imagining"). If business needs knowledge (axiomatic, I think), and knowledge needs language (cf Aristotle, John Gage), why wouldn't a good deal of writing in businesses be epistemic? Surely you don't think that knowledge creation occurs exclusively in schools?
Cheers,
Jamie
>>> [log in to unmask] 05/22/02 09:52AM >>>
Jamie, can you say more about epistemic writing in the workplace? I'm
having a hard time imagining what that might be like, even in research,
high-tech, or knowledge-intensive workplaces.
The closest I can come is the design specs that are currently circulating
around the group of people working on the next-generation courseware here
at UM . . . the specs do shape what the designers and developers do, but
they are also an attempt to map out how this system (which is not yet
built) will work *in the future* . . . so they're subject to constant
"vision and revision" as people run into technical snags that alter what
can be done, or how it can be done. In that sense, the specs are both
predictive and descriptive, both a blueprint and a guess.
But that's clearly not the same kind of writing-to-know that occurs in
schools . . .
Marcy
--On Wednesday, May 22, 2002 9:35 AM -0400 Jamie MacKinnon
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> A note from a "non-academic" workplace:
>
> While I agree with the thrust of your comments, Anthony, I'd quibble with
> the notion that, in general terms, student writing "is epistemic
> (primarily to do with knowledge-making), and largely concerned with
> individual growth (writing to learn, writing to know), whereas [workplace
> writing] is instrumental (oriented to action) . . ."
>
> I reckon that in most research, high-tech, and / or knowledge-intensive
> businesses, a lot of writing is epistemic (*as well as* "instrumental")
> in nature. I would also note a significant instrumental / transactional
> aspect to most student writing - - for many students much of the time,
> the sole purpose in writing is the obtaining of a satisfactory mark (and
> from the prof's point of view, the transaction is: "You give me writing;
> I give you grade").
>
> To Roger, I say that the "construction of knowledge" mentioned in the
> Newman book needs to be carefully considered. Professors' expectations
> (often tacit, sometimes explicit) at the undergrad level are usually for
> the re-creation or reiteration of existing knowledge.
>
> Deeply epistemic writing - - writing that advances knowledge by posing
> new problems, by posing old problems in newly fruitful ways, and by
> proposing innovative responses to problems, takes place (in felicitous
> moments) in grad schools as well as the workplace.
>
> All this to say, I'm leery of a presumed epistemic / instrumental
> dichotomy, and of conflating workplace / school with "authentic" /
> inauthentic.
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> To leave the list, send a SIGNOFF CASLL command to
> [log in to unmask] or, if you experience difficulties,
> write to Russ Hunt at [log in to unmask]
>
> For the list archives and information about the organization,
> its newsletter, and the annual conference, go to
> http://www.stu.ca/inkshed/
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Marcy Bauman
Media Consultant
College of Pharmacy
University of Michigan
734-647-2227
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
To leave the list, send a SIGNOFF CASLL command to
[log in to unmask] or, if you experience difficulties,
write to Russ Hunt at [log in to unmask]
For the list archives and information about the organization,
its newsletter, and the annual conference, go to
http://www.stu.ca/inkshed/
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
To leave the list, send a SIGNOFF CASLL command to
[log in to unmask] or, if you experience difficulties,
write to Russ Hunt at [log in to unmask]
For the list archives and information about the organization,
its newsletter, and the annual conference, go to
http://www.stu.ca/inkshed/
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
