Preview this article: The Interaction of Instruction, Teacher Comment, and Revision in Teaching the Composing Process, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/rte/16/3/researchintheteachingofenglish15736-1.gif

Preview this article: On Students' Rights to Their Own Texts: A Model of Teacher Response, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/33/2/collegecompositionandcommunication15855-1.gif

I. A. Richards has said that we begin reading any text with an implicit faith in its coherence, an assumption that its author intended to convey some meaning and made the choices most likely to convey the meaning effectively.' As readers, therefore, we tolerate the writer's manipulation of the way we see the subject that is being addressed. Our tolerance derives from a tacit acceptance of the writer's to make the statements we are reading.2 When reading a textbook, for instance, we assume that its writer knows at least as much about the book's subject as we do, and ideally even more. When we read a newspaper article, we take for granted that the writer has collected all the relevant facts and presented them honestly. In either case, derives partly from what we know about the writer (for instance, professional credentials or public recognition) and partly from what we see in the writer's discourse (the probity of its reasoning, the skill of its construction, its use of references that we may recognize). The sources of writers' authority may be quite various. But whatever the reason for our granting authority, what we are conceding is the author's right to make statements in exactly the way they are made in order to say exactly what the writer wishes to say. The more we know about a writer's skill, the more we have read of that individual's work or heard of his or her reputation, the greater the claim to authority. This claim can be so powerful that we will tolerate writing from that author which appears to be unusually difficult, even obscure or downright confusing. For instance, our having read Dylan Thomas' Fern Hill with pleasure may lead us to work harder at reading Altarwise by Owlight, although we may not understand it readily and may not derive the same pleasure from reading it. As readers, we see this harder material as a problem of interpretation, not a shortcoming of the composer. Writers may, of course, compromise their authority through evident or repeated lapses, but, in general, Lil Brannon is an assistant professor at New York University, co-director of the Expository Writing Program, and coordinator of the Writing Center. She is completing a text entitled Writers Writing. C. H. Knoblauch, also an assistant professor at New York University, is co-director of the Expository Writing Program. He is a co-author of Functional Writing and has just completed a book on eighteenth-century theories of the composing process.

An abstract and an outline are the initial means to interest an editor in your work. The editor has to decide — in the context of the publication's audience — what you will tell readers that they don't already know, whether they would want the information, and how they could use the information. To proceed beyond the proposal, write the “meat” of the article first; then develop an appropriate introduction. Even when the editor intends to publish your paper, heavy editing and revision are likely, but your real stake is in the idea, not the final words.

Preview this article: At the Age of Revision (poem), Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/32/4/collegecompositionandcommunication15888-1.gif

Preview this article: Analyzing Revision, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/32/4/collegecompositionandcommunication15887-1.gif

Neman's extensive revision of the first edition, (published by Merrill in 1980) takes into account the recent explosion of scholarly inquiry and research composition while remaining focused on the basic substance of pedagogy - the nurturing of the student mind. Her approach is student- centred , based on twenty-five years of classroom experience, and will both train its readers to teach writing and tactfully provide an opportunity for them to master writing skills themselves, Covers process, structure, grammar, documentation, narrative, poetry, and stylistic problems from nonstandard dialects.

Preview this article: Revision Strategies of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/31/4/collegecompositionandcommunication15930-1.gif

Preview this article: Perception and Change: Teaching Revision, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/42/3/collegeenglish13854-1.gif

A prerequisite to effective writing is logical thinking. Often the act of writing forces the organization of one's thoughts. Effective writing involves consciousness of the purpose of a message, awareness of the reader's needs and interests, evaluation of available information (quantity and quality), and attention to the order of presentation. First drafts should never be accepted; review and revision should be standard procedure.

Seven mathematical expressions are presented, with comments, for the guidance of technical writing by engineers and scientists. They determine when to write an interim report, when to write the final report, when to inform the higher echelons, how many extra readers could result from one more revision, what grade to give a revised version, how much reading time increases with increasing article length, and how various factors affect the science-world communication gap. The formulas stem from analogies between communication problems and solved problems in science and are intended to stimulate bread-boarding in technical writing.

Two crucial aspects of creating persuasive reports are (1) knowing and expressing the main message and (2) organizing the material in a logical, complete, thought sequence. The report can be a figurative pyramid of progressively involved detail with conclusions and recommendations up front (at the top) followed by methods, explanations, proofs, data, etc. Critical revision and refinement must precede the finished product.

The US Copyright Office issued interim regulations and application forms at the end of 1977 to implement the major revision of the copyright statute adopted by Congress in October 1976. Aspects of the law and the regulations especially relevant to the actual registration of an original work for copyright protection are reviewed briefly, the application form is exhibited (TX for literary works; VA for visual arts is very similar), and instructions for filling out the form are excerpted.

THE United States will soon have in effect the first major revision of its copyright law since 1909. This revision was made necessary largely by the successful engineering of xerography into increasingly convenient and economic copying machines. The new law legitimizes most examples of single, personal-use copying but severely proscribes multiple and systematic copying without copyright-holder authorization.

This anthology, first published in 1976, is used in courses on television criticism, television history, media & society, and broadcasting. The 7th edition, which is comprised of virtually all new selections, features a slightly revamped organization, adding sections on History and Reception. In addition, this revision expands its international focus, with pieces on the Chinese soap opera, Brazilian telenovelas, and the role of race in Puerto Rican television, among others. Finally, this book remains current in its treatment of technology, making it the gold standard of anthologies on television.

In Simple & Direct, Jacques Barzun, celebrated author and educator, distills from a lifetime of writing and teaching his thoughts about the craft of writing. In chapters on diction, syntax, tone, meaning, composition, and revision, Barzun describes and prescribes the techniques to correct even the most ponderous style. Exercises, model passages -- both literary and unorthodox -- and hundreds of often amusing examples of usage gone wrong demonstrate the process of making intelligent choices and guide us toward developing strong and distinctive prose.

Of the three segments of the English curriculum, language, literature, and composition, the stepchild seems to be composition. Few English teachers are likely to prefer teaching composition to literature, and composition seems to be most often neglected (Squire and Applebee, 1968) . Of the thirty-six English teachers who participated in the study reported here, only four preferred to teach composition. Since both the teaching and the evaluation of writing are so often frustrating experiences and the results of hours and even years of instruction so often unrewarding when the end product is considered; it is not difficult to sympathize with English teachers' preference for teaching literature instead of composition. At the same time, English teachers have complained of the general lack of research in the area of composition, such insufficiency making their task even more difficult and frustrating because of their need for specific evidence that might corroborate their practices, provide new insights, or give them direction for new or different approaches to the teaching and evaluation of writing. Attempts to measure the effectiveness of instruction in composition or the quality of the writing produced thereby are more often discouraging than rewarding because of the subjective nature of the task, the many variables involved,

The process of revising a technical or scientific paper can be performed more efficiently by the people involved (author, co-author, supervisor, editor) when the revision is controlled by breaking it into a series of steps. The revision process recommended is based on the levels-of-edit concept that resulted from a study of the technical editorial function at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory of the California Institute of Technology. Types of revision discussed are substantive, policy, language, mechanical style, format, integrity, and copy clarification.

THOSE OF US WHO FOLLOW a write-from-your-own-experience philosophy in teaching Freshman Composition consistently run into one problem: a batch of trivial narrative papers to read each week. Following the lead of Ken Macrorie, Donald M. Murray, and, more recently, Joseph Comprone, we take this approach to keep our students out of the depths of the library, where they would spend hours researching a boring subject to an artificial and boring paper, and at their desks engaged in the process of writing, where they belong. Freshman writers, we believe, are apprentices in a skilled trade-writing-and like carpenters' apprentices need material to practice their trade on. But novice carpenters are not sent to the lumber mill to pick up their own materials each day. They keep hammering and sawing and all the material they need is kept at their fingertips. Freshmen have all the material they need for writing at their fingertips, too: their own experiences. Too often, however, they fashion those experiences into a dull, firstperson narrative of What I Did. The genuine significance of what they did lies undiscovered and undeveloped. The challenge for writing teachers is to help the beginners examine their experiences critically and turn the corner from simple narration to wider meanings and truth in their writing. In my freshman English courses I shy away from relevant or significant assigned paper topics. In fact I make no assignments at all other than that writing teacher's cliche, write about what you know. When I do get a paper entitled Pollution or Inflation I ask the writer how much substantial information he has to pass along to his readers. Does he really know the ins and outs of economic theory, for example? The answer is invariably no. A budding John Maynard Keynes is rare these days. Then I have two options. I can send him to the library to research inflation, in short to pick up a quick course in economics. Then he can a research paper, that exercise in footnotes and boredom. Or I can tell him, Write about something you know more about, something you've had some experience with. the next week it's My First Day in College. After three weeks of revision it's a well-honed My First Day in College. Full of hard-hitting specific detail and crisp dialogue, it still makes me yawn. I find myself repeatedly asking, So what? Simple narration, I reasoned, is the mode for best presenting unique experiences

Although you write the proposal before, and the report after, you do the research, both require the application of principles that will demonstrate to the reader two skills needed by every investigator: clear thinking to produce worthwhile research, and clear writing to communicate the results of that research. Sharp delineation of the problem to be addressed, thoughtful preliminary preparation, careful outlining, and concentration on orderly sequence of ideas in the first draft will help produce a unified, coherent proposal. Critical revision, with emphasis on simple, direct, forceful language will enhance the persuasiveness of the proposal.

Preview this article: Film-Editing and the Revision Process: Student as Self-Editor, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/25/5/collegecompositionandcommunication17187-1.gif

The concept of copyright has greatly changed through the years, both in importance and definition. The conflict of personal right of ownership versus the public welfare has grown increasingly complex in recent times. A familiarity with the historical perspective is necessary to understand these developments. Even today, the Copyright Revision Bill lies before Congress and long-awaited decisions will be made to shape events in the immediate future. These decisions will affect the student and the professional alike by their effect on the availability of materials to everyone. The ease and availability of present-day photocopying necessarily will affect the nature of the decisions. This paper gives an overview of the historical background, and status of present law, and the possible future role of copyright.

be described as "the way you write," rather than as "proper words in proper places" or "the dress of thoughts," then their thesis is that your style should be such that the reader will do with your report, or because of your report, what you would have him do.Their comments on style and their own easy familiar way with words combine to make Technical Writing a good example as well as a collection of precepts.details are given adequate recognition.Some of the Suggestions for Writing are comprehensive and some specific; some of the Sentences for Revision involve simple matters, others present challenges.Worthy of note is the excellent treat ment, in all Sections, of the structural and logical aspects of planning a tech

Preview this article: Can Freshmen Be Taught the Art of Revision?, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/10/4/collegecompositioncommunication22256-1.gif