Refer to high, middle, and low styles with what you read/worked on from the edited collection.

I would classify the article I read for my stylistic revision either at a low or medium style. Honestly, it read like a rough draft. I did appreciate that it was not written in "high" style. The author used common words and explanations, but I would have liked for it to have been more polished.

The article was about using ePortfolios as part of a job or graduate school application. Many of the sentences were wordy and redundant. The headings did not reflect the entirety of the content of the section. It was a difficult read. But it did not contain flowery, verbose text. I did wonder if the author was working toward a word-number goal, however, because it seemed so redundant.

I currently work with some employees who believe the "high" style presents them as being more intelligent. If they have to choose between the words "use" and "usage," they will always choose "usage." They think it sounds "higher," and maybe it does. I think it sounds insincere.

I'm not sure I can think of a situation where I like the high style over the medium or low style, as long as the low style is free of glaring errors.

~Rhonda

What is the dark side of the Web, and how does it play into your paper about style and technology?

There are many dark sides to the Web: the anonymity it provides is the first one I think of. The next would be the intimidating vastness of the information. What's true? What's not true? I do not spend as much time on the Web as many people I know, and I do not know a lot about the different social networks, or communities that Baron spoke of in his chapter. I was astonished to learn that "China employs as many as thirty thousand web police who regulate [that] nation's growing virtual space...."

The posts about anti this or that annoy me and/or upset me, so I don't read them. Right after my dad had his stroke, I was doing a lot of online research. I would be looking for something in particular but get caught up into reading someone's blog or a discussion board that began with one topic, but often diverted to something else. People seemed so unwilling to acknowledge another's beliefs and comments. We don't have to agree with them, and it is maddening to me to read attacks on someone just because of something they have said.

As far as how this might relate to my paper: I am going to be working with the ideas around resumes in relation to online applications, formatting and content, or formatting versus content. I want to study the history of the format of the resume and likely put out a call to all hiring managers that context trumps format these days. The "dark side of the Web" in this situation is in the format being stripped from a resume, in the applicant not being able to be creative (and maybe standing out among other applicants) with their lack of format. I am not entirely sure where this is going right now, but as I research, I am confident it will come together.

~Rhonda

Thesis attempt

As I mentioned in class, I really do not want this to be "just" an assignment. I am interested in learning more about how the different generations use or do not use -- or may be do not know how to use (generalizations noted), online applications, specifically the upload of a resume. I currently work as a corporate recruiter, and in this capacity, I am the first screening of all applicants. If an applicant copies & pastes their resume into the applicant tracking system rather than uploading a pdf or Word doc, it loses its format and is incredibly hard to read. In fact, just today I received an e-mail from a manager asking me to contact an applicant to have her submit a formatted resume. She said this one was too hard to read, to know what she experience she had, exactly.

I wonder how many times managers do not work to read what is really there -- just because it's formatted badly, or not at all. I also wonder if copying and pasting resumes rather than uploading them has anything to do with simple ignorance on how this simple application works, and if that has anything to do with the generation in which the applicant lives. I suspect younger applicants have no difficulty uploading documents.

So, my thesis:

Even though there has been a history of the accepted format of resumes, and though online application systems offer the option of uploading nicely formatted documents, recruiters and managers should not deny an applicant an interview based solely on the lack of formatting in a resume submitted with a job application, as managers may be guilty (even unknowingly) of age discrimination.

I am very interested in learning how I can make this more solid. It feels pretty large, still, but I think I like it.

Thanks!
~Rhonda

Think about all you've read in Baron, Lanham, and Williams--as well as the presentations and discussions you've seen. Define style (again). And, list out as many elements of style as you can. Feel free to borrow from peers' ideas in their blogs, too. You might indicate which are hardest for your to see in your own writing.

Style is the character acting the action, being the subject of the sentence and the topic of the tale. Style is being correct -- or decidedly incorrect. It is word choice and structure choice. It is intentional (I hope). Style is the way the words fit together like a puzzle, without gaps -- to display the whole picture, the idea, the meaning. Style is being ethical to your readers. It is how the writer presents the message, what words to use and where to use them and the tone. It is following the Golden Rule of Writing: Write to others as you would have them write to you. It's all about presenting the style that your readers (audience awareness) need at the time they need it. Style is rhetoric.

Baron provides examples of "a better pencil." What does he mean by the concept, and how might that impact style? Consider what your approach to your final course paper might be and how Baron's ideas relate to it.

I have enjoyed reading Baron's accounts of how the technologies of writing have evolved. I was reminded of how fascinated I was as I studied language development in classes in my master's program as my young daughter was learning to talk, putting concepts with words. It's fascinating stuff that we don't think about once they know how to talk.

I know I take for granted many things... electricity, clean water right out of the faucet, hot water for a shower -- whenever I want it, e-mail, the freezer so I can have ice for a cold drink. I hadn't thought of taking for granted the fact that I can move around and have a writing utensil at my fingertips (literally) where ever I need it. I had to stop and think what it might be like if I had to prepare my area for writing, get the quills ready and sharp, and make sure I have a safe place to set the ink bottle. I wonder how many documents were ruined when the ink bottle tipped -- ink everywhere. Maybe it is how we feel now when we delete on accident. I think I usually cry first and then just get mad.

I do still prepare my "spot" for writing, though. I often do best with piano music in the background (Jim Brickman style), M&M's in a dish (so I don't eat the entire bad), and something to drink--unsweetened tea is good.

The idea that using a pencil to write because it forces pause and therefore produces better writing seems like a stretch to me. I had to make myself to learn how to compose on the keyboard, but now I can type SO much faster than I can write, it gets frustrating when I have to write something out long-hand. I think typing helps me get my thoughts on paper faster. True, I delete about 50% of what I ever begin with (blogs excluded!), but to have the thoughts on the page is a very large part of getting to the final product.

I would like to begin thinking about my approach to my final paper, but right now, I do not have a good grasp on what the exact assignment is for that. I am hoping we discuss more in class. Honestly, and I would say this to only these "geeky" English-language-loving people who enjoy a lively conversation about metaphors (we did, yes?), that I am looking forward to spending time in the TTU library doing research soon! :) Though the online research does take something away from actually being IN the library among the stacks, being able to actually touch and smell those books.

Later,

~Rhonda

What is elegant to a technical communicator, would you say? Is that something different than what your current or future profession subscbribes to?

I like Albert Einstein's quote in chapter 10 about keeping things simple. I think clear and concise is "elegant" to a TC, and I appreciate a nice turn of phrase (mostly that I find in novels and not in TC). Sometimes when I read those novels, I write down sentences I especially like. My family thinks I'm a bit odd at times. :)

The idea of "simple" with TC goes against the world of academese in many situations. It also often goes against what many in the business world use, which is where I sit now. I often find myself trying to read through convoluted e-mails where the writer either assumes I already know much of what the message is about and leaves off too much information, or one that gives me puffed up vocabulary that is unnecessary, I think in an attempt to sound "intelligent." I would love to have a day where I red-line e-mails that are convoluted and messy and just send them back to the writer, refusing to answer the questions until I get the text in a more clear and concise way. :) And, I wonder how long I might keep my current job with that approach. I guess I'm not really that brave.

What are the most valuable types or strategies to commenty you've seen? What worked or didn't work on the comments offered by Dr. Rice?

The most valuable strategies I've seen have to do with a more heavy edit where the editor asks questions, for example, "have you thought about this or that." I do like it when comments are posed in a questioning tone. It makes me still feel like I have control of my text rather than just needing to change things because one reader thought something should be changed.

I also find it helpful in a revision process to have my paper read out loud to me. Well... honestly, I hate it when someone reads my work to me, but it seems to expose things that might be out of place and need to be changed.

As far as the comments I received: when I read some of them, I though, "oh, yeah... good point." In one place, I thought, "Hummm... I guess I took a more casual approach to this assignment than what was expected." Maybe I should have been more formal, but I'm in a rebellious phase against "formal" writing I think. Maybe because of a person at work that tries to use "big words," (nominalizations, usage rather than use, etc. I think he is just trying to sound smart.) He sounds like an idiot a lot of the time. This week my quote is from the front page of the Ethics chapter in Williams by Albert Einstein. "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."

When I read another comment, I thought, "Gosh I wish I had read that (my text) more carefully. That's just bad." About another comment I thought, "No, that's really what I meant. I want to keep that sentence that way."

I am interested in looking at the regular person as a "writer," and not necessarily the student who is studying writing as the "writer."

I like where this paper is going, and I will work on it some more.

Later --