My Writing and Research Processes

The readings from the past two weeks have definitely made me reflect on my own writing and research processes.  For starters, Nathan’s piece really made me look at what I do in regards to my academics and if any of it could be considered “cheating”.  I have always taken pride in doing my own work and not taking the ideas of others to claim them as my own.  In addition, I always give proper credit to work in my research papers.  What Nathan’s article really brought to my attention was the fact that many of the students today engage in academic behavior that we do not view as cheating, but that is in fact just that. 

            As far as Sommer’s piece on revision strategies, her findings where not that surprising to me.  I had figured that student’s revision strategies were less than structured as well as in clear stages.  In high school, my English teachers were constantly reminding us that in order to be a better writer, we have to be constantly revising, and not just for grammar (which most of us were guilty of) but for content and structure as well.  This is one of the differences that Sommer’s found between the student writers and the experienced writers.  I think that in order to improve my writing, I have to open-minded.  I think an important factor in order to improve my writing, I have to try to model my writing process as well as my research strategies on those that Sommer’s found in her studies.  

Nathan's view

Rebecca Nathan’s piece on cheating was a very interesting read for me.  Because it was written from her first hand experience as a student at the school, I found it to be quite accurate.  The findings that she compiles from asking students around campus revealed the same thoughts that I generally have with cheating.  A lot of the time, as Nathan state, students don’t think of what they’re doing as cheating (like working on homework together or checking answers with someone else).  In addition, I agree with her proposition for each of us to define cheating with our own definition.  Not everyone agrees that certain things are morally wrong and could be considered “cheating.”  I also agree with Nathan in the sense that I believe that the students have a very different view of what is cheating that perhaps the administration.  The administration would be a lot stricter in their definition of cheating than most students would define it.   Some things that administration would consider cheating has become a daily occurrence for most students.  Even one of the student in Nathan’s study stated, “everyone does it.” Finally, I agree with Nathan that cheating is entangled with many other aspects; it’s not always a black and white situation.  Morality, purpose, time, and the university are just some of the factors involved in determining what is and isn’t cheating in today’s schools.  

Reading Aloud

            Along with finding a lot of grammatical errors in my paper, reading aloud benefitted me in other ways as well.  My peer members had commented on my paper changing topic or going off topic towards the end but I didn’t really pay attention to their comments because I felt that I had changed the subject on purpose.  Upon reading it aloud, I realized how much weight I put on the second topic and that was not needed for my paper.  I realized that I had said way too much about it and that it upset the balance of my paper.  Now, I will be able to go back into my paper and notice all of the excess that I can delete, and narrow my focus.  I was able to catch grammar and sentence structure errors as well because I was reading the mistakes and it clearly sounded wrong.  Generally, I think reading papers out loud is a good thing to get in the habit of doing because I think it gives you more of an objective point of view to make your paper better because it gets it out of your head.  It forces your ears to listen to the mistakes, whether it is grammatical or stylistic, and is easier to recognize the changes that need to be made.   

Sources

McIntosh, Ewan.  “Blogging Improves Young People’s Confidence in Their Writing and Reading.” Edu.blog.com.  December 19, 2009.  http://edu.blogs.com/edublogs/2009/12/blogging-improves-young-peoples-confidence-writing-reading.html

According to Ewan McIntosh, social networking has given young people not only the opportunity to write more as well as read more than ever, but has improved their attitudes towards it as well.  In research conducted four years ago, blogging proved to improve writing by providing an audience to the student as well as improving reading.  According to BBC, the percentages of student that feel more confident in their writing are those that blog or use other social networking.  They found that it is a direct positive trend between the amount of forms of communication and strong literacy skills. 

            I think this source had good information, but I don’t think it was presented in the best way.  When reading it, I was a little confused as to what was happening.  In addition, I don’t think the author transitioned between each topic that they were covering.  He/She made good points but it could have been organized a lot better.  With this being said, I understand that it is a blog online so its purpose might not have been to present the information in a formal manner, but I think it would have been a lot easier to pull out the necessary information for someone to use. 

                                                                                                                  

Sutherland, John. “Can u txt?” The Guardian.  November 10, 2002.    

            According to Sutherland, “hurry sickness” is a major problem of our time and texting, because it’s quick, is a go-to for communication, especially in the UK.  He compares texting to “Snot-talk” by which he means it’s a one-time thing. Because of the 160-character limitation, abbreviation is key when texting.  Up to date (only 2002) it was seen as being a mainly European trend that the US hadn’t caught on to yet.  Sutherland continues that the language used in text messages is “bleak, bald, sad shorthand.” He blames the take-off popularity of texting on mental laziness and its ability to mask poor literacy skills and makes a point that the fad will be gone within a few years, once they come up with a newer technology.  Lastly, he brings up the point that writing is taking over speech in today’s world.  Where in the 13^th century there were very few “scribes”, today everyone is a scribe. 

            I do not agree with Sutherland.   Some texting may be unsophisticated and bleak as he says, but I do not think it is affecting our ability or desire to write.  Nor is it taking over our ability or desire to speak.  I realize that Sutherland wrote this article in 2002, before the real wave of texting had erupted, so it was seen more of a treat than it actually is.  His whole argument is based on what he thinks that texting is doing to people’s communication and is not backed by any concrete support.  He has a cynical tone that would offend some people that didn’t necessarily agree with him.  He should have written it more objectively, with facts to prove his point.  In the way that he wrote, he will not be able to convince any audience that has a differing opinion from his own, but instead probably only enrage him.  For this preason, his piece has no real purpose, because he isn’t aiming to convince or change anyone’s thought.  It seems as though he is writing simply to write.