We can serve as the "user advocates" on campus. This is a role we are historically and theoretically well situated to play because of our background in rhetoric and our emphasis on adapting discipline-specific content for diverse audiences.
Charlie is right when he points out that there is much about teaching with technology that we don't understand. There is a lifetime's worth of research to be done on the uses of instructional technologies, but that doesn't mean that we don't bring a boatload of valuable expertise to the table or that we don't have a great deal to offer. After all, teaching with technology is not and must never be about technology; it's about purposeful communication. It's about adapting the medium and the content to meet the needs of the audience in order to effect some purpose.
That message isn't substantively different from the one WAC programs been trying to deliver for decades now. Just as we have been teaching writers to address the needs of audiences, we can force technology developers to address the needs of users. Hardware and software interfaces are, at their core, acts of communication. After all, what does the verb "to interface" mean if it doesn't involve some form of communication? And if people in WAC programs don't understand and have expertise in communication, who does?
If WAC programs are going to play any role in supporting instructional technologies, then we need to stop thinking of technology in terms of "speeds 'n feeds." Instead, we have to think in terms of human-computer interactions. We have to analyze the use of technology the same way we'd analyze any other act of communication. We have to consider the aim, audience, and modes of communication deployed by an interface. When we do, I think we'll find that we have a great deal to say about the appropriate uses of technology in courses. We need only have the courage to step forward and proclaim our expertise. We need only to refuse to be silenced by the specialized discourse of technology experts. Indeed, if WAC people can't overcome the intimidation intended by the use of jargon in a discourse community, then we really are in trouble.
– Tharon Howard
tharon@hubcap.clemson.edu