Course Texts (All texts available online or through Canvas)

Burnett, R. (2004). Technical Communication. Cengage.

Caradonna, J. (2014). Introduction. Sustainability: a history (pp. 1-20). Oxford University Press.

Coppola, N.W. (1997). Rhetorical analysis of stakeholders in environmental communication: a model. Technical Communication Quarterly. 6(1), 9-24.

Dragga, S. & Voss, D. (2001). Cruel pies: The inhumanity of technical illustrations. Technical Communication, 48(3), 265-74.

Gopen, G. D. & Swan, J. (1990). The science of scientific writing. American Scientist 78(1), 550-558.

Grabill, J. T. & W. & Simmons, M. (1998). Toward a critical rhetoric of risk communications: producing citizens in the role of technical communications. Technical Communications Quarterly 7(4), 415-441.

Greenwood, A., Lauren, B., Knott, J., & DeVoss, N. (2019). Dissensus, resistance, and ideology: design as a rhetorical methodology. Journal of Business and Technical Communication. 33(4). 9-24.

Hewitt, J. (Winter 2004). First impressions: writing a good abstract. The Communication Factor (pp.2). Rice University Newsletter.

Houser, H. (2016). Human/Planetary. Time: A Vocabulary of the Present. (pp. 144-160). New York: New York UP.

Katz, I.R., Haras, C., & Blaszczynski, C (2010). Does Business Writing Require Information Literacy? Business Communication Quarterly, 73(2), 135-49.

Katz, S. B. (1992). The ethic of expediency: classical rhetoric, technology, and the holocaust.” College English 54, 225-275.

Levanda, A.M., Behrsin, I., Disano, F. (2021). Energy Research & Social Science, 71, 1-13.

Markel, M. (2016). Technical Communication (12th ed.). Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin.

Moller, M., et. al. (2019). Participation through place-based e-tools: a valuable resource for urban green infrastructure governance. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 40, 245-253.

Moller, S.M. & Olafasson, A. S. (2018). The use of e-tools to engage citizens in urban green infrastructure governance: where do we stand and where are we going. Sustainability, 10, (pp. 1-10).

Sentell, E. (2016). Making memories: Writing and designing more memorable documents. Technical Communication, 63(2), 136-153.

Sun, H. & Getto, G. (2017). Technical Communication, 64(2), (pp. 89-94).

Technical Communication. (2017). 64(2): Special Issue on localizing user experience for culturally sensitive design (pp. 89-94)

Walsh, Linda (2015). “The Visual Rhetoric of Climate Change.” WIREs Climate Change, 6, 361–368.

Grading Scale

Grade/Range Percentage/Range Descriptive
A+ to A- 98% to 90% Superior Performance—student work addresses writing the situation and assignment completely and/or with unexpected insight across rhetorical, technical, and aesthetic categories. Superior work is expert-like, inventive, and/or makes an original contribution to field of knowledge. Contributions to Teamwork and Discussion exceed expectations.
B+ to B- 89% to 80% Above Average, High Quality Performance: Student addresses writing the situation and assignment, but work lacks detail, creative insight, or reflection. A level of effort and performance beyond minimum requirements that continues to improve, but lacking overall in detail, creative insight, or reflection. Contributions to teamwork and discussion meet expectations.
C+ to C- 79% to 70% Average Performance: Generally competent work and a level of effort that attempts to meet the course requirements but may be incomplete or irregular. Uneven contributions to teamwork and discussions.
D+ to D- 69% to 60% Work that is uneven in quality or suggests incompetence. Irregular contributions to teamwork and minimal contributions to discussions.
F 59% and below Failure to meet minimum criteria, or substantial portion of course work not submitted. No contributions to teamwork and discussions.

Common Feedback Chart

Common Policies

You must familiarize yourself with Georgia Tech’s Common Policies about evaluation rubrics (grading), course completion, attendance requirements, participation in class, non-discrimination, the Communication Center, accommodations, academic misconduct, syllabus modifications, and learning outcomes. You will be responsible for these policies, and when you sign the Statement of Understanding, you affirm you are familiar with these policies.


Since the course id “Hybrid Touchpoint,” all but 2 course sessions are completely remote and/or asynchronous, so regular WCP attendance policy does not apply. While you will never be required to meet face to face or at specific times, there may be a penalty if you miss a scheduled meeting with group members or me.


Active participation and engagement in Discussion Boards, process activities, and major team projects is required. You may be penalized if you have not done the reading or fail to regularly participate in online discussion boards and activities.

Late or Missing Assignments

Let me know in advance if you need to negotiate a due date for large or small assignments. Late work will be accepted, but a penalty may be assessed if you do not contact me in advance of the due date. If a penalty is assessed, the assignment will drop from its original grade by one-third a grade letter for each day past the due date. An assignment that is one day late, for instance, may drop from an A to an A- or a B+ to a B. Alternatively an assignment that is three days late, may drop from a B to a C or a B- to a C-.

Course Completion

In all sections of LMC 3403, not completing any component of the course, including projects, assignments, or workshops, may result in failure of the course, as determined by the instructor in consultation with the Director and Associate Director of the Writing and Communication Program.


While revision is built into all major assignments, during the semester you will have the opportunity to revise one major assignment that earns a B- or below. If you wish to revise a graded assignment, meet with me during office hours or by appointment to discuss steps and due dates. The revised assignment will receive an entirely new grade (not an average of the old and new grade).

Academic Integrity

Cheating and plagiarism are serious violations of the Georgia Tech Academic Honor Code. Plagiarism is intentionally passing off sentences, paragraphs, or entire papers written by someone else as your own original work or submitting whole or partial projects produced for other classes. When you intentionally use language, ideas, images, or other material or code without fully acknowledging its source/authorship in citation, you will receive and F for engaging in academic dishonesty and be referred to the Office of Student Integrity, as required by Georgia Tech policy.


Please note that this class requires some walking outdoors. Georgia Tech supports students through Access Disabled Assistance Program for Tech Students (ADAPTS). Any student who may require accommodation for a documented disability should inform me during the first week of class or when you become aware of your disability. Students who anticipate difficulties with the content or format of the course due to a documented disability should arrange a meeting with me at the beginning of the semester, so we can create a workable plan for your success in the course. ADAPTS serves any Georgia Tech student who has a documented, qualified disability. Official documentation of the disability is required to determine the eligibility for accommodation or adaptations that may be helpful for this course.

Communications Center

Please consider taking one or more projects, at any stage of the writing process, to the Georgia Tech Communications Center. The Center is an excellent resource for all students working on white papers, oral presentations, storyboards, videos, poster designs, podcasts, or professional materials. Make your appointment online to meet with a tutor in Clough Commons, Suite 447.


The Ivan Allen College of Liberal Arts supports the Georgia Institute of Technology’s commitment to creating a campus free of discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, or veteran status. We further affirm the importance of cultivating an intellectual climate that allows us to better understand the similarities and differences of those who constitute the Georgia Tech community, as well as the necessity of working against inequalities that may also manifest here as they do in the broader society.

Content Warning

If you find you are unable to work with any assigned course text due to content, see me and accommodations will be made.

Course Website and Syllabus Modifications

Please note that the course calendar, assignments, and texts are subject to updates over the duration of the semester, and while the course site will be revised to reflect changes, the .pdf syllabus will not.

Student-Instructor Agreement Form