The Finer Aspects of Evaluation and Translating Technicality

In preparation for the second assigned essay, we have worked with evaluation and review in terms of establishing a specific category, defining criteria, and associating the positive or negative relationship between category and criteria.  We have practiced through in class exercises, evaluating the pilot episode of Lost as well as one another’s blogs.  We have also read several professional level reviews of The Walking Dead and Nirvana’s album Nevermind.

There were some important points I took away from both of these evaluations.  For one, audience consideration in review is tremendously important.  The audience may need to be met more than halfway.  In the case of the Walking Dead review, without ever seeing the show, I was still able to follow the review reasonably well.  A good review may also require informational components to bring the audience up to speed.  Another aspect, more particular to the Nevermind "review," was the connection the author attempted to build with the reader.  More than a quarter of the material was on a personal note, highlighting some of the author’s history and his personal connection to the music.  This helped in establishing a sort of credibility for the author, especially considering his review was not solely of the album, but on how it fits into the larger picture of changing industry, times, and tastes.

My review is to be a bit more technical in nature.  I am aiming to evaluate the Kaveri architecture used in a recent mid-range iteration of microprocessors by Advanced Micro Devices (AMD).  I have chosen this for my evaluation as it is closely tied to my discipline, my personal interests, and my potential dream to work with designing and fabricating microprocessor technologies.  I understand it is a highly technical and interest-specific review, and I hope to use it to hone my skills in simplifying the technical for a larger audience, which I see as an incredibly important skill for a computer engineer.  This being the case, I hope it will be understood and accepted that my review may be a bit more consumer focused.

It is obvious that my review may need quite a bit of informational content.  After some initial thought, I would say that my specific category could be considered a budget workstation-enthusiast mid-range quad core desktop microprocessor.  It is a mouthful, but quite specific, which I suppose is the aim.  As discussed in our Lost evaluation, it is important that I focus on relevant criteria for the specific category, not necessarily for this particular chip.  The primary criteria at first consideration would be performance benchmarks, power dissipation, and cost.  Considering the diversity in this market, it will be difficult to establish direct competitive cost and performance relations.  In order to adequately ascertain competitiveness, I will need to research competing chips at similar benchmarks and prices and compare at two different levels, which should be interesting.  I hope to include some detailed analysis and comparison between Intel and AMD technologies in-depth, but I partially feel that such detail may be less relevant for this audience.  There is a time and a place to geek out, but this may not be it.

When? Just About All the Time.

Last week’s action plan assignment was very helpful in determining the forms of professional writing in my field.  It served a fruitful purpose of giving me a basis for developing the next assignments on evaluations, press releases, and proposals.  But how are these used in computer engineering?  I am aware of the prevalence of technical reports, users' manuals, circuit descriptions, and the like, but when will someone in my position need to write an evaluation, press release, or proposal?  My conclusion: in nearly every stage of the design or production process.  We discussed the separate connotations of these three modes of writing in class, but I would propose that they are, in fact, very closely related and may be applied in unison.

When a project is being defined and refined by a team of experts, there will be many different propositions.  Whether this project is the architecture of a microprocessor logic unit or the layout of the cooling systems in a server farm, many large and small decisions must be made.  Official documents will need to convey the process the team used to reach their conclusions (evaluation), the plan of action for communication with the customer (proposal), and a release of relevant information to the public (press release).

When a company is releasing a new product, each of these methods is employed.  Whether that product be a two cent integrated circuit, a thousand dollar laptop, or a modular industrial fabrication system worth nearly a million dollars, the same considerations must be made.  Teams of individuals, internal and external to the developer, will examine the product in question to authenticate its performance and adherence to standards.  Proposals may be sent to close affiliates of the developer, encouraging adoption of the product.  Press releases will be composed for the market of the product to seed interest, enthusiasm, and, ultimately, sales.

In the likely event of a malfunction or catastrophic failure of a product, all of these approaches are still necessary.  Evaluation is a critical stage after a failure, used to determine the cause and depth of the issue.  This stage of the process may take longer than any other, and it must be the most closely documented as the other two will reference it recurrently.  Press releases will be formed to quell outcry and assure resolution.  Proposals for such resolution will be rapidly produced and acted upon.

It is important to note that a failure of this magnitude is often caused by a failure in previous evaluation, proposal, or release.  Evaluation may have been completed in error.  Proposals may leave out a critical component due to eleventh hour adjustments or funding cuts.  Releases may communicate inaccurate information to the public, causing a firestorm that must be snuffed out quickly.  This further emphasizes the need for close attention to professional writing of all types in every stage of the process.

An Educator and an Engineer

As a beginning to my research into professional writing in my career path, I interviewed Professor Stanley Pisarski of the electrical engineering technology department at the University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown.  I chose to interview Professor Stan partly because of the writing experience I gained under his guidance in electronics lab.  Professor Stan is also the writer behind most electrical engineering laboratory manuals in our program, making his perspective a very useful one.

If I had any doubts about the need for professional writing skills in my discipline, Professor Stan quickly expunged them.  He thoroughly outlined his use of professional writing, providing a double perspective as both a professional and an educator.  He noted that he typically expects to spend one to two hours a day on writing alone.  Much of this is rooted in the need for documentation of nearly all work that is done.  Professor Stan was very clear in his mindfulness that “communication in written form…is essential to work with others in the engineering field.”

I had written much previously for Professor Stan in terms of technical laboratory reports, so that was something I wanted to discuss more in depth with him.  My concerns were in the satisfactory realization of both professional and public level writing, as well as the balance of technicality and “creativity” in these reports.  Professor Stan was encouraging in his experience that, with time and practice, the ability to transition between writing for technical individuals and the general public will become seamless.  He confirmed that one should develop the aptitude to write with both sides in mind.  Professor Stan also commented that even fact-filled technical reports “can be made to be more enjoyable to read, without diluting the details, by adding some creative ideas or thoughts into the report.  It is always good to show how the information in these types of technical reports [is] applicable to real world situations.”

I deeply enjoyed my exchange with Professor Stan and have taken much away from it.  I have heard it said that an engineer is the bridge between theory and reality.  Engineers must balance feasibility, practicality, and the latest in technology, while effectively communicating with teams of experts at the concept and execution ends of the spectrum, to bring about the new.  This interview aided in my continued realization of how professional writing skills, whether for documentation or communication, are absolutely necessary for future success in this field.

Relevance of Professional Writing

Writing is important.  Clear communication of thoughts and ideas is one of the most imperative skills to master.  At least that is what I have always been told.  When I was preparing to graduate from high school, I looked forward to putting aspects of grammar, style, and literary exploration behind me.  I saw myself in an exciting new world where I would take classes in only the topics in which I was most interested and passionate.  I could not have been more wrong.

However, I cannot say that I am disappointed.  I have learned much more in the past few years about how significant matters of communication really are.  My profession recognizes clear speaking and writing as a fundamental cornerstone.  In the rapid advancement of technology, new ideas and methods must communicated even more quickly.  Standards must be developed, shared, and altered as change continues to shape the landscape.  Professional writing can take the form of technical reports, individual memorandums, user manuals, requests and proposals for new hardware and software components, or marketing and media releases to entice the buyers of the latest and greatest.  The skills and experience necessary for success in all of these subfields will almost never be found in one individual, further increasing the need for proficiency in communication between them.

It is clear to me that professional writing is a critical skill, but exactly how I will use it remains to be fully known.  A computer engineering technology degree (they tell me) opens one to many possibilities.  I may find myself in a small business working on an information technology management team.  Here I would require professional writing skills to address corporate supervisors and effectively communicate the needs of the local staff, while also drafting logs, help tickets, work orders, and the like.  At the other end of the spectrum, I may find myself in an academic laboratory writing hundred page reports on the latest research, techniques, and discoveries.  Not to mention…*shudder*…grant applications.  It is highly likely that programming will be a large part of what I do wherever I end up, which I suppose is a professional writing of its own.

I find myself struggling with the formal rigors of my discipline.  Many of my professors have encouraged the embrace of more creative processes in design and problem solving.  Those in many branches of my field consider their work to be similar to a fine art.  But how much passion can be injected into a formal and professionally written technical report?  Can hundreds of lines of machine code lend a poetic beauty in form while only ones and zeros in function?  Does the rise of digital narratives signify a creative relationship between man and machine?  In my discipline, to know what it means to write professionally, these are a few of the more interesting questions I have to answer.