“Subjects” in and of Research: Decolonizing Oppressive Rhetorical Practices in Technical Communication Research

Abstract

Despite the recent surge in social justice and decolonial scholarship, technical and professional communication (TPC) research remains a potential site of oppression. This article is meant to be a call to action; it attempts to (re)ignite discussions about what we value and how we express what we value. It encourages the field of TPC to be more responsive to the experiences and struggles of research participants—those we engage during our knowledge production process. I explore what I call oppressive rhetoric in TPC research with a specific focus on the term subjects in institutional review board forms and in the reporting of some TPC research about research participants. I assert that in spite of our best efforts in advancing the goals of marginalized groups and despite the forward-looking trajectory of progressive research, more work needs to be done to address oppressive rhetoric in TPC scholarship.

Concomitant Ethics: Institutional Review Boards and Technical and Professional Communication's Social Justice Turn

“…Regardless of paradigm and methodology, TPC researchers are reminded that as a humanistic field, all research is a humanistic endeavor (Herndl & Narhwold, 2003). Agboka (2021) noted rhetorical concerns with IRBs' use of terms such as "human subjects," which is used in the Common Rule. Yet many IRBs apply alternative language, such as "human participants," as Agboka proposed, to better respect participants' autonomy.…”

“…Scholars at the fore of social justice work have thoughtfully critiqued IRBs (Agboka, 2021; Walton et al, 2019) and also served on them. The literature on IRBs in writing studies (when I refer to writing studies, I am relying on the Classification of Instructional Programs code 23.13, which includes technical writing) started swiftly in the 1990s and, after a lull, picked up again between 2010 and 2020.…”

Local Knowledge as Illiterate Rhetoric: An Antenarrative Approach to Enacting Socially Just Technical Communication

“…That individual, thus, is considered backward, primitive, and culturally stagnant. Such use of oppressive/abusive colonial rhetoric or what Agboka (2021) refers to as “oppressive rhetoric” (p. 162) marginalizes or delegitimizes groups of people. To be clear, Agboka (2021) defines oppressive rhetoric as “offensive linguistic practices that make obvious an individual or group's privileged outlook of the world and contribute to a history of colonialism and marginalization” (p. 163).…”

“…Such use of oppressive/abusive colonial rhetoric or what Agboka (2021) refers to as “oppressive rhetoric” (p. 162) marginalizes or delegitimizes groups of people. To be clear, Agboka (2021) defines oppressive rhetoric as “offensive linguistic practices that make obvious an individual or group's privileged outlook of the world and contribute to a history of colonialism and marginalization” (p. 163). Agboka makes us understand that oppressive rhetoric works to dismiss, oppress, disable, colonize, and recolonize.…”

“…For instance, the EC officials denigrated the knowledge, feelings, and concerns of users who had fears about how the biometric could marginalize or affect some people negatively. The competing narratives do not only create a sense of marginalization, it also creates a power dynamic between the EC officials and local knowledge: “a superior group and an inferior group” (Agboka, 2021, p. 163).…”