Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Peer Review Recap, Part 2
The Wetpaint wiki site was user friendly, to say the least. I love that when you're at the site and you click sign in or 'easy edit,' a box pops up on top of the page you already have open instead of refreshing the page entirely. It made for quicker navigation of the site, I think, compared to, say, Google Docs. After initially thinking that I liked Google Docs more, I realized that the simplicity of this wiki site made editing much easier. Lastly, the log of edits on this site seems to be much more efficient than Google Docs. That would make sense though, seeing as how the idea of a wiki is the ability for anyone to edit text, so they probably have a pretty good way of keeping track of who's doing the editing. Both peer edit systems we have used have been easy to use and I'm sure I will use them again in the future, probably in my classroom.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
What Are Others Saying?
Forcing me to read two books that I probably wouldn't have chosen to on my own, then asking me which one is more effective is probably not the best way to figure out which is best. Not saying you (prof. Krause) indeed forced me to read them, nor was that what you were even after but... I was thinking to myself on my way from class after a discussion... "I suppose since they're about the same thing it makes sense to compare them but... why?" or something of the sort. One of my classmates must have been channeling me that day 'cause in a blog they wrote:
"The question as to which book is more effective, to me, seems to be the wrong question. I think that the books swim in different waters."
I agree totally and I especially liked the analogy. Clearly they're targeted at different audiences so to say one is more effective than the other, generally speaking, wouldn't be doing the other justice. That being said, as a college student, I definitely fall into SOME audience. Whether it is an audience targeted by S&W or Williams... well, that's a good question. In the same blog, my fellow classmate also wrote:
"I think what I got from Williams will be helpful, but I don't see myself going back to it again and again. It is very dense and it was difficult to get through. For me, the primary function of Strunk & White is as a reference, or a reminder of things easily forgotten; Williams deals with the most basic level of style--clarity, cohesion, empahsis, coherence--for me, these are things that become internalized to a large extent. I think the information in Williams needs to be digested and absorbed; it doesn't make sense to me as a reference book."
Once again, right on. I'm not going to say I particularly liked one more than the other but in the event I ever needed to reference one of these reference books, it would most likely be S&W (unless I couldn't find it, it's much smaller and less yellow). In some aspects, I think I fall into the audience for both books. But seeing as how college students usually take the path of least resistance, you don't have to do much looking around in S&W, whereas Williams is a little bit more narrative and what your looking for may be hidden in the middle of a paragraph. Looks like Strunk & White come out victorious in the epic battle of more effective style book for a college senior who thinks his writing style is perfect no matter what they say (jk).
"The question as to which book is more effective, to me, seems to be the wrong question. I think that the books swim in different waters."
I agree totally and I especially liked the analogy. Clearly they're targeted at different audiences so to say one is more effective than the other, generally speaking, wouldn't be doing the other justice. That being said, as a college student, I definitely fall into SOME audience. Whether it is an audience targeted by S&W or Williams... well, that's a good question. In the same blog, my fellow classmate also wrote:
"I think what I got from Williams will be helpful, but I don't see myself going back to it again and again. It is very dense and it was difficult to get through. For me, the primary function of Strunk & White is as a reference, or a reminder of things easily forgotten; Williams deals with the most basic level of style--clarity, cohesion, empahsis, coherence--for me, these are things that become internalized to a large extent. I think the information in Williams needs to be digested and absorbed; it doesn't make sense to me as a reference book."
Once again, right on. I'm not going to say I particularly liked one more than the other but in the event I ever needed to reference one of these reference books, it would most likely be S&W (unless I couldn't find it, it's much smaller and less yellow). In some aspects, I think I fall into the audience for both books. But seeing as how college students usually take the path of least resistance, you don't have to do much looking around in S&W, whereas Williams is a little bit more narrative and what your looking for may be hidden in the middle of a paragraph. Looks like Strunk & White come out victorious in the epic battle of more effective style book for a college senior who thinks his writing style is perfect no matter what they say (jk).
Monday, October 6, 2008
Comparing S&W with Williams
The glaring difference between Strunk and White and Williams is the fact that Strunk and White give you succinct grammar rules, do’s and don’ts, whereas Williams focuses more on reasons why people may make mistakes in their writing and ways to avoid doing the same. Williams does touch on some specific rules, but not nearly as in depth or straight to the point as in Strunk and White. I definitely feel it’s more affective to give the reader some insight into why we tend to make mistakes. When we realize why we’re wrong, it’s much easier to break a bad habit than if we were simply told what we’re doing is incorrect with no explanation.
Williams, as a whole, is much easier to get into because there is some sense of “flow” and a much higher level of readability. Strunk and White has more of a reference book or manual feel, that doesn’t necessarily lend itself to being read cover to cover. That being said, while Williams maybe be easy to get into, it is probably a little more difficult of a read because everything isn’t just spelled out with numbers and bullet points. Clearly both texts have their pros and cons.
The titles of the two books alone hint at their differences before you even get to page one. When I hear the word ‘element’ I think of smaller pieces that make up one whole, and that’s exactly how Strunk and White formatted their book. The word ‘grace’ in the Williams title has its own connotation. It’s difficult to perform any activity gracefully before having some certain mastery of the topic and/or being given more applied guidelines or instructions. The Williams text expects that you have some previous knowledge and offers some insight into the short comings of other writers so that you can avoid making the same mistakes that could make your writing unclear, disjointed, etc.
The three elements I discussed from Strunk and White were: write in a way that comes naturally, do not affect a breezy manner and use orthodox spelling. All three of these elements are addressed in Williams, though often indirectly. I may have read over it, but I don’t recall Williams making reference to using orthodox spelling. Being a style book for the advanced writer though, I get a sense that it is implied. There is a thin line between not “affecting a breezy manner” and writing in a way that comes naturally, and I think it is addressed throughout each chapter in different ways. In the chapter on Elegance, Williams admits he can’t tell a writer how to be graceful and elegant the same way he can how to be clear and direct, but he can describe some devices such as balance vs. symmetry or emphasis vs. rhythm that will help. “Knowing the ingredients and knowing how to use them is the difference between reading cookbooks and cooking.” (153). To me this means that his suggestions are open to some interpretation and modification. Strunk and White offer vague explanations how to be natural/how not to be breezy, while Williams gives examples of what he considers elegant writing and how to get there.
It’s hard to say which text is the most effective overall is because I like the fact that I can go to Strunk and White for clarification on a rule and find an easy answer. However, I think re-reading Williams a time or two will actually help me become a better writer. I’ll take the easy way out and say give me both.
Williams, as a whole, is much easier to get into because there is some sense of “flow” and a much higher level of readability. Strunk and White has more of a reference book or manual feel, that doesn’t necessarily lend itself to being read cover to cover. That being said, while Williams maybe be easy to get into, it is probably a little more difficult of a read because everything isn’t just spelled out with numbers and bullet points. Clearly both texts have their pros and cons.
The titles of the two books alone hint at their differences before you even get to page one. When I hear the word ‘element’ I think of smaller pieces that make up one whole, and that’s exactly how Strunk and White formatted their book. The word ‘grace’ in the Williams title has its own connotation. It’s difficult to perform any activity gracefully before having some certain mastery of the topic and/or being given more applied guidelines or instructions. The Williams text expects that you have some previous knowledge and offers some insight into the short comings of other writers so that you can avoid making the same mistakes that could make your writing unclear, disjointed, etc.
The three elements I discussed from Strunk and White were: write in a way that comes naturally, do not affect a breezy manner and use orthodox spelling. All three of these elements are addressed in Williams, though often indirectly. I may have read over it, but I don’t recall Williams making reference to using orthodox spelling. Being a style book for the advanced writer though, I get a sense that it is implied. There is a thin line between not “affecting a breezy manner” and writing in a way that comes naturally, and I think it is addressed throughout each chapter in different ways. In the chapter on Elegance, Williams admits he can’t tell a writer how to be graceful and elegant the same way he can how to be clear and direct, but he can describe some devices such as balance vs. symmetry or emphasis vs. rhythm that will help. “Knowing the ingredients and knowing how to use them is the difference between reading cookbooks and cooking.” (153). To me this means that his suggestions are open to some interpretation and modification. Strunk and White offer vague explanations how to be natural/how not to be breezy, while Williams gives examples of what he considers elegant writing and how to get there.
It’s hard to say which text is the most effective overall is because I like the fact that I can go to Strunk and White for clarification on a rule and find an easy answer. However, I think re-reading Williams a time or two will actually help me become a better writer. I’ll take the easy way out and say give me both.
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Revising with Williams
Original: It is the responsibility of the student to call the instructor’s attention to a possible grading error in a timely manner, but not more than 12 months after the questionable grade is posted. Three years following the close of any term of enrollment, the student’s transcript will be considered to be the final indisputable record of academic achievement. Specifically, at the end of three years, grades are considered final: and no changes will be made to transcripts (e.g., no term or individual withdrawals, no grade omissions, no recalculated grades based on mathematical or clerical error, no incomplete removals, etc.). The only exception to this rule will be master’s specialist and doctoral field-based research, internships and dissertation hours.
Revised: It is the student’s responsibility to call to the instructor’s attention a possible grading error no more than 12 months after the questionable grade is posted. The student’s transcript is considered the indisputable record of academic achievement. Grades are considered final and no changes will be made after three years following the close of any term of enrollment (e.g., no term or individual withdrawals, no grade omissions, no recalculated grades based on mathematical or clerical error, no incomplete removals, etc.). Master’s specialist and doctoral field-based research, internships and dissertation hours are the only exceptions to this rule.
In William's Clarity chapter he explains that most clear sentences begin by identifying a character and then giving that character an action. This allows the reader to identify what exactly the sentence is about and what the character in the sentences is doing, and thus, making it much more clear. I tried to do this throughout the passage. In the Cohesion chapter Williams discusses managing the flow of information. To get this passage to flow, I took out some redundant phrases and rearranged a few sentences so the same thing wasn’t being repeated at the end of one sentences and the beginning of the next. Finally, in William’s Emphasis chapter it says that you should manage the endings of sentences by doing a few different things. One of the ways is to move important information to the right, or the end of the sentence. I found this a bit difficult, seeing as how it kind of contradicts the first rule I used which said begin a sentence with the character. However, I realized that the character is not always the most important part of the sentence, often it’s the action of said character. Thanks to Williams, one paragraph from the EMU catalog is now written much better.
Revised: It is the student’s responsibility to call to the instructor’s attention a possible grading error no more than 12 months after the questionable grade is posted. The student’s transcript is considered the indisputable record of academic achievement. Grades are considered final and no changes will be made after three years following the close of any term of enrollment (e.g., no term or individual withdrawals, no grade omissions, no recalculated grades based on mathematical or clerical error, no incomplete removals, etc.). Master’s specialist and doctoral field-based research, internships and dissertation hours are the only exceptions to this rule.
In William's Clarity chapter he explains that most clear sentences begin by identifying a character and then giving that character an action. This allows the reader to identify what exactly the sentence is about and what the character in the sentences is doing, and thus, making it much more clear. I tried to do this throughout the passage. In the Cohesion chapter Williams discusses managing the flow of information. To get this passage to flow, I took out some redundant phrases and rearranged a few sentences so the same thing wasn’t being repeated at the end of one sentences and the beginning of the next. Finally, in William’s Emphasis chapter it says that you should manage the endings of sentences by doing a few different things. One of the ways is to move important information to the right, or the end of the sentence. I found this a bit difficult, seeing as how it kind of contradicts the first rule I used which said begin a sentence with the character. However, I realized that the character is not always the most important part of the sentence, often it’s the action of said character. Thanks to Williams, one paragraph from the EMU catalog is now written much better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
