Winsor

In this post, I will discuss the structure of Dorothy Winsor's research paper on the subject of engineers' writing.

Dorothy Winsor structured her research, "Joining the Engineering Community: How do Novice's Learn to Write Like Engineers" into four sections: an introduction, :A Preliminary Study", "Student's Comments", "Implications", and "Next Step."

The introduction is structured as follows: she presents a predetermined understanding of her audience, followed by the question her research will answer and what the report will focus on. This is an effective approach because it prepares the reader for what is to come.

Her methods section begins with an explanation of her subjects and why they were chosen for the study. She explains the task that the subjects were asked to complete and then presents the results and what they mean. This is an excellent way to get to the point and avoid excess fluff.

Next, is the "Student Comments" section, the largest section in her paper. This sections provides feedback from her subjects and their supervisors about the topic in research. This section provides the reader and researcher with extra information that may prove useful to the study. This information provides a more personal feeling to the responses of the subjects, explaining why they answered they way they did.

The "Implications" section tells the reader what to take away from this research. This is a section that belongs in nay complete research paper. The reader needs to understand why this was done and what the results mean to them.

"Next Step" is the final sections of Winsor's paper. In this section, she discusses steps to take in the future that would further the research on her topic. This provides possible ideas for anyone who wishes to taker her research to the next level, or answer any questions that may have arisen while reading her results.

307 words.

Mapping the Writing Lives of First-Year College

A group of researchers surveyed a set of 2110 first year college students (of which, 1366 completed the survey) about their most frequently used writing genres and studied the factors that influenced them.

From the start, it was found that SMS text messaging, emails, and lecture note taking were the most frequently used types of writing. Forty-six percent indicated that texting was the most prominent for of writing for them. Only nine percent chose email as their most frequently used.

A list was compiled of what was determined to be the most frequently used writing genres. Of the top ten, half were of a digital form. Another was created based on how each genre was valued. Texting still ranked number one. However academic papers and other school/career papers were ranked just below, unlike the previous list. The genres that were practiced less frequently were ranked higher in value.

Although text messaging was ranked number one in both lists, it was valued considerable less than it was used, forty-seven percent and seventy-eight percent respectively. Of the genres associated with school, ninety-seven percent were done as an assignment.

Students seemed to associate word processing with their most valuable writing. However, Twitter and other social media platforms were used the most frequently. Participants also preferred to write alone; an interesting statistic consider how open many students are through social media. Also, students rarely sought help from available writing consultants or tutors, even for their higher value genres.

The end of the article explains in great detail, the researchers' methods throughout the survey process. They even present possible biases that may have skewed the results.

This was a well thought research article. It presented its findings clearly throughout the paper. I found it to be an appropriate read for the assignment at hand.

Word Count: 300

Cullington

Michaela Cullington poses the question, "does texting affect a student's writing skills?" She compares both sides of the argument and hypothesizes that textspeak has little to no effect on writing. Her findings do well to back this up. She interviewed seven high school students about their writing and found that, in formal writing assignments, each student understood that textspeak was inappropriate for the classroom. In fact, most of the students interviewed rarely used textspeak in day to day texting communication. Cullington found similar results when she approached teachers on the subject. Some of the studies in Cullington's article even suggest that texting might indeed be beneficial to students. Texting is now their preferred method of communication, meaning they are writing more than they would otherwise. Her conclusion was essentially the same as her hypothesis; texting has no effect on formal writing.

In reading this article, I asked myself if I have ever used textspeak in my own writing. Looking back, I can't recall ever using texting lingo when writing or texting. And why would I? With auto-correct and suggested text, it's more of a hassle to use shortened words than to type it all out. Besides that, I always found the shorten textspeak silly and childish.

I took a step back and thought about the writing of my peers throughout high school as well. Not once could I recall reading any form of textspeak in anyone's writing. Even the students with poor grammar and spelling skills understood what was appropriate for a paper and what wasn't.

Based on what was given in the article and my own experiences, I have to agree with Cullington's conclusion. Through my own experience, I can safely say that texting had no negative effect on someone's ability to write in school.

Word Count: 297

Baron

Most of the articles we have read throughout this semester haven't quite held my attention. They've been just sort of, "meh." For some reason, perhaps due to Baron's explanation of the pencil as an engineering marvel, "From Pencil to Pixels: The Stages of Literacy Technologies" has been my favorite article so far. All in all, Baron's paper is a fantastic example of a well made research paper. That being said, I'm not entirely sure it's the best choice to read for our upcoming research assignment. Reason being: Baron's paper was a culmination of information that was already available, whereas, the assignment asks students to gather their own information without looking for it online. The assignment is meant to be a case study or survey, similar to that of "Fanfiction, Poetry, Blogs, and Journals: A Case Study of the Connection between Extracurricular and Academic Writings."

The point of Baron's paper is to explain to readers that the technologies we take for granted today were once something to be in awe of. For example, he spends a couple pages explaining how much work goes into the making of a pencil. In the past, the pencil making process was a mystery to the masses. Finding an inexpensive, quality pencil was to do. Some were even imports of European design because of the high quality lead they had available to them. Today, if you borrow a pencil, it will probably feel like every other pencil and write just as dark with the same amount of pressure. We wouldn't thunk anything of it.

Baron goes on to explain the technologies of the past and how they were perceived by the people. His finding date back to ancient times when the idea of writing was just that, an idea. Plato felt writing would ruin our memories, as we wouldn't need them anymore. Others believed to be the product of evil. Far gone are the days of chiseling on stone tablets. There were negative thoughts about the pencil, the telegraph, telephone, and even today, there are some who believe computers shouldn't be used for word processing. Computers aside, society today has affordable access to pens, pencils, and paper. All three of which would be almost impossible for someone to make at home. Yet we still use them everyday without batting an eyelash.

Baron's article proves that writing technologies have changed, are changing, and will change in ways we can't yet imagine.

Rose

1. Create a list of all the rules that, according to Rose, interfere with "the blockers'" writing. What rules, if any, do you find yourself forced to follow that seem to get in the way of writing?
Rules:
- Must have three or more points
- Outlines must be complex
- Story must be linear in order to make a point
- Cannot stray from set plans
- Paper must catch the audience
- Must be written grammatically
- Following unrealistic rules

- I often write outlines that include far too many subtopics than could ever fit in a paper of reasonable length. I end up with either a scatterbrained summary of each topic, or I write detailed sections about only a few, forcing me to leave out any that may have helped flesh out a paper.

2. Describe the difference between the rules that blockers in Rose's study were following and those that non-blockers were following. What accounts for the difference?
- "The blockers" follow their own strict set of rules, many of which were issued to them throughout their years in school. "The non-blockers" have only a few rules to follow, and the ones they do have, are allowed to be broken at the benefit of the paper.

4. Based on Rose's study and descriptions of writers and their rules, write a "rule" explaining what makes a rule good for writers, and what makes a rule bad for writers. You'll get bonus points if you can tell whether your rule is an algorithm or a heuristic.
- A good rule should be one that is not overly restrictive during the writing process. Each should exist to aid the writer and, when necessary, able to be broken without sacrificing the content of the paper. A bad rule would do the opposite; It would hinder the writer, and likely cause the paper to suffer.

304 words. Confirmed using www.wordcounter.com

Sommers

QDJ Page 587

1. Sommers says that the language students use to describe revision is about vocabulary, suggesting that they "understand the revision process as a rewording activity". How is that different from the way she argues that revision should be considered?
- Students tend to "revise" by swapping out certain words with words that might sound more intelligent, or by restructuring sentences. I feel Sommers thinks the revision process should be spent restructure the argument; moving entire paragraphs, whatever it may be, around so that the paper flows and gets the point across. Also, that revision never has a deadline. Revisions should be made as many times as a paper needs in order to achieve its goal.

3. In her introduction and in analyzing students' descriptions of revision, Sommers focuses quite a lot on the difference between speech and writing. In your words, what is she saying that difference is between the two, and why is this difference relevant to how we understand revision?
- Once something is spoken, it cannot be revised as it can in writing. Sommers believes this is the wrong way to view revision. Students are taught that writing and speaking are two separate things. In total honesty, I do not understand any of her explanations about the importance of the study, or, to answer the question here, why it is important to differentiate between speech and writing.

5. What do you think Sommers means when she says that for experienced writers, revision is based on a non-linear theory in which a sense of the whole writing both precedes and grows out of an examination of the parts? What does she mean by "the whole writing"? What does it mean for writing processes to be non-linear (not a straight line of progress from the beginning to the end)? And why do you think that experienced writers see writing as a non-linear but student writers tend to see writing as linear (pre-write -> write -> edit)?
- For experienced writers, revision is not something that comes after the draft. Revision takes place throughout the entire writing process. Non-linear theory is based upon writing whatever comes to mind around the subject, and through revision, decided what stays, what goes, and what is missing to make a complete work. Students see writing as a linear process simply because it's easier for them. It's much easier to fit a writing assignment in their schedule when they can break down the process, piece by piece.

7. Sommers' research, she says, makes her believe that student revision practices don't reflect a lack of engagement, "but rather that they do what they have been taught to do in a consistently narrow and predictable way." Where do you think students got the idea that they should see writing as transcribing and revising as changing words? Does this match with what you have been taught about writing and revising? if not, what has been different in your experience?
- When writing becomes assigned homework in school, students hate it. It's time consuming, usually boring, sometimes stressful, and always done at the last minute. There are a select few who enjoy it, but maybe that has to do with ignoring the teacher? Teachers would often tell students what they wanted to hear, or whatever they could say that made writing sound easy. We were taught how to write a paper in a very formulaic fashion: intro paragraph, three main topics, and a closing paragraph that repeats the message in the intro. After the writing process is through with, start revising by replacing an frequently used words with synonyms and more descriptive words. That's how I was taught to write, as were many others. I assume that was the easiest way to teach a class of students that had no other choice but to be in school.

 635 words. Confirmed using www.wordcounter.net

Narrative Response

After submitting your narrative, what changes would you make? To the paper? To your writing process?

Details, details, details! I had a difficult time recalling enough significant information about my experiences. I likely should have spent more time brainstorming and trying to organize my sponsors. Considerably more time could have been spent tweaking sentence structure, as well as spending more time with a thesaurus, trying to create an overall more descriptive paper.

72 words. Confirmed using www.wordcounter.net