In about 300-500 words, think through the following:
*the process for the editing project
*think through the process(es) for each project--newsletter, remediation, editing--and examine them side by side
*what connections do you see between these process(es)
Remember reflections should be thought-out and specific--use details, refer back to past assignments and/or readings, etc.
I had reservations when approaching the editing project because I do not have a forte for line editing. When I started this project, I was a bit nervous because editing is not something I am fully confident in. After sitting down with the newsletter I needed to edit, reading it and rereading it I noticed I naturally found grammatical errors. I first looked at the content of the entire piece, to get a feel of what Alex was trying to get across with her keyword memory. Then I looked at the layout and made suggestions for improvement. After words, I got in deep with line editing. I discovered through this project that I enjoy editing and offering advice to improve people’s work. The business letter is great practice because one day we will all need to know the format for this in order to come off as a serious professional. After my editing was complete, I wrote the letter. I wanted to be positive but honest--constructive criticism if you will. I wanted to sound authoritative as well, which I think came across. I chose a simple layout for the letter. I like basic sleek looks with minimal colors- like blacks and crèmes. I think the look of my letter gets across my style.
ReplyDeleteI have noticed with all of these main assignments that before I start them, I think about how I am going to approach the project and what I think, before scholarly input, of the subject. For the newsletter, I just thought about how I wanted to approach voice in writing. I first defined what voice was to me, and then I researched scholars. It all came together step by step. For the remediation project, I thought long about what medium I needed to work in to fully explain the key term. I decided on a video and then produced the script. This took a period of time to come up with. For the editing project, I thought about how I was going to approach it before I read Alex’s newsletter. I have learned more about my process of composing after reflecting on these three projects- now completed. One connection between these processes is first thinking about the project before I research and start the project. Another connection I notice now is that I can’t sit down and do the project in one sitting. I need to do it in steps, that way the finished project is thought out over time, rather than a rushed work in progress. Overall I have learned much over the course of these main projects and think they tie together well. I can now see overlap which tells me how I compose. Before I never thought about how I composed, but now my work can be improved because I know my process.
The process of the editing project was a different one than I had experienced before, as editing was pretty unfamiliar territory for me. I’ve never done a formal editing assignment before this one, only more informal revisions of fellow students’ papers in other classes. While I felt pretty confident about my ability to think critically as an editor and make suggestions on how to change the overall tone and message of the newsletter for the new audience in the assignment, I was concerned about how successful of a line editor I would be. I’ve always been the type to miss small errors, so I tried my best to have a careful eye and catch any errors that clouded meaning or weakened the authoritativeness of the newsletter. Mostly, I just tried to approach the project with the audience switch in mind. My job as the editor was to take the original version and change it for the expanded audience, so rather than getting overly caught on trying to edit every single line, I tried to keep the focus on making substantial suggestions that would truly change the tone and content to better suit the new expanded audience. Overall the process went relatively smoothly though, as I felt I was able to make some good suggestions to improve the newsletter in a way that fits the switch of audience.
ReplyDeleteEach of these first three main processes obviously had their differences as each came at a different point in the overall process of composition, but I feel that there were some similarities as well. As far as differences between the processes, the first project had a more straightforward process of doing research and then creating a new composition. The remediation was more a test of my ability to think diversely in my composition as I tried to create a multi-media piece. And then finally this editing project was a test of my ability not only as a composer, but as a reader, looking at a finished product and trying to improve upon it. However, those differences aside, there was a lot of similarity in the type of thinking required in all three of the assignments because each involved targeting a specific audience, and I tried to think about that audience as I worked on each project, since one of the key aspects of my theory of composition is writing for the target audience. I think each assignment tested a different part of my skills as a composer, but that was definitely a common thread throughout all of them. Having finished though, I can say I found that I enjoyed doing this editing project more than I anticipated, and I think it was a worthwhile undertaking for me in something I didn’t really have any experience with.
When I first heard the prompt for the newsletter project, I was excited because I thought it would be pretty easy. How hard could it be to correct something? I was actually quite mistaken. When I read over my partner Amanda’s paper, I didn’t really know where to start. I was only fixing small grammatical errors and rewording things. I didn’t really know how to transform someone else’s work to fit a new audience.
ReplyDeleteThen we had our workshop day which helped me so much. Amanda had her work so organized and it gave me ideas for what I needed to do. She separated her text so that it was easier to edit with more space in the margins. I immediately knew this is what I needed to do. Amanda was also very good at pointing things out that didn’t fit and then suggesting a new way to do it. I think this is the most important part about editing. A good editor doesn’t just change something without a good suggestion as to how to fix it. Reading over Amanda’s edits pointed me in the right direction.
I continued my editing by going through line-by-line to see what I could do to make some changes for the new audience. I started with the quotes she had from the scholars. I suggested ways that she could extend them to the new audience. She also had many sentences that were completely directed towards freshmen. So I changed them around so that they fit the whole student body.
Once I did my editing, I was able to rewrite my letter, in a more professional way. I was able to make everything I edited clear for the writer and it also helped me sort things out in a more organized way. After writing the letter, I went back and edited the layout. I suggested that Amanda use more muted colors because her bright colors seemed to only attract a younger audience. I also wanted her to change her pictures to actually show the audience what ideology is and where it comes from. Then I added all of this to the letter.
I then sent my paper to my teacher so that she could double check and make sure that I was on the right track. Thankfully, I was and only needed to go back and fix some grammatical errors. After doing that, I just added all the small things like a logo and a publishing company. Then I went over all of my editing one last time.
I think this project was very different from the initial newsletter. It was easier in that I didn’t have to do much research or think up a completely new idea. But it was harder in that I had to change someone else’s ideas and hard work. I think it related more to the remediation project because it was a transformation, not between mediums, but still similar. When I remediated my newsletter, I really had to think of how to completely change it. With the editing project, I didn’t have to change it completely, but I had to change it for a new audience. This was the hardest part for me, but I think I did it well on both projects. I really enjoyed this project, despite the difficulties. It really helped me learn how to edit past the grammatical errors and more for content. I feel that this is a skill I can definitely take with me into the career field.
The process for the editing project I had to take to a different approach than things like the American Gangster, and the magazine that we all produced together as a class. It required a lot more in depth thinking, a lot more detailed work, and was a lot more time consuming than the other two projects I just named, because we did this assignment solo without the help of our classmates. After finishing this project, looking back on the other projects this one took a lot more intellectual talents that we have learned over the course of the editing section this semester.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading it at first, I had to sit back and reflect. What did I already know about this work? Well to be honest, my memory was vague. There was no way I could edit Noelle’s newsletter without a full understanding of the word. Originally, I had thought that the meanings of remediation and editing were very much alike. On the final touches of this project, I found myself thinking otherwise. Remediating isn’t necessarily editing itself, but more of a form of editing. It’s when you take something from its original piece and place it into a new and different form. Editing is much more in depth, in my personal opinion. It wasn’t even just about the grammatical errors. I got to see how it is to really ‘edit’ due to the change in the audience. The written article by Sullivan and Eggleston came back to me at the end of this assignment. They stated, “There is standard proofreading, editorial proofreading, copyediting, and substantive editing” (3). When doing my remediation project, I did not necessarily focus on editing the main content, but rather convert my newsletter into a new and more creative form. Nancy Sommers stated in her article, “Most teachers estimate that it takes 20 to 40 minutes to time 20 students per class, times 8 papers, more or less during the course of the semester adds up to an enormous amount of time.” I most definitely sympathize for teachers now (English of course). The amount of time it took to sit down and critique the entire composed piece Noelle created was really shocking. I also found it hard to be critical and firm, because I get flustered at times when people criticize my work. In addition, I had to edit in a way that Noelle would understand. Normally when I edit I scribble all over the page, and sometimes people can’t even tell the corrections that I made.
It took a lot of focus and concentration to visualize myself as an outside looking in. I thought to myself: would I understand this if I was someone else? In the end, I found myself to be pretty on point the best that I could. I can say that now I do realize, that unfortunately editing is not my strongest point!
Honestly, when Kara was first telling us about this project, I wasn’t looking forward to it. I tend to think that I enjoy creating new things as opposed to just editing one that already exists. Also, I feel like in previous English or writing courses, I can never really find things to edit. I think in classes that were mandatory for everyone, not just English majors like ENC1101 or high school courses for example, we were just too afraid to hurt people’s feelings. We’d add commas and periods here and there but not really edit and revise to improve it to the fullest. After being in a different environment, this being some of our potential careers, we somewhat get the concept of editing. The point isn’t necessarily to fix grammatical and mechanical errors, but to also think outside the box and come in from an objective view and question how things can be said to make it better. To briefly describe my process for this project, I first started out by reading Briyannas newsletter once all the way through to understand what she was discussing. Then I read through again, this time doing “Standard Proofreading” according to Sullivan and Eggleston, by fixing the surface-level grammatical and mechanical errors or confusions. I marked these in red using the style guide in the reading by Sullivan and Eggleston. Next, I read through the newsletter again, and marked in green suggestions to make phrases or words sound better and flow better. Then, I read through the newsletter again, this time marking out things in blue that may have been okay for the original audience of first year college students, however was sort of inappropriate for the new audience being the entire student body. Last, I looked at the overall look of the newsletter and made suggestions for color and things of that nature.
ReplyDeleteAs I think about the processes from all three projects, they differ not only because of the difference in expectations from each project, but because I feel I have grown as a writer, and my creativity and thought has expanded as well. With the newsletter, I decided to be bold and venture to the Digital Studio. I used InDesign, which was a great program for creating newsletters and things of that nature, but I wasn’t very good at using the program in a small amount of time. To actually compose the newsletter, I just used the thought process that first comes into mind when I think of the term “audience” (which is my key term). That thing is big crowds all watching something of interest, especially concerts, but other things such as football games, fashion shows, etc. I wrote explaining the role of audience in composition while relating it to music and artists of our generation.
For the remediation project, I decided to do a non-digital one since I had all the problems creating the newsletter. Once again, I used the first idea that popped in my head; a collage. The idea of my collage was for an audience of celebrities to be at a Taylor Swift concert. She had the largest pictures in magazines. For everyone else, they were in order from biggest to smallest, so the idea was for stadium seating. I felt like I was really creative with this project.
There are a few things I thought of that overlaps in my different processes of my three main assignments. I like to play off of whatever idea comes to mind when I first think of the word. Obviously this will serve for an easy and fun way for the audience to understand as well. I also noticed myself, in all three projects, looking for ways to not necessarily fix a mistake, but to make the project as interesting as possible to the audience. I also read up on as much information about the project so I’ll know everything and I can just do it and know what I’m doing. I look for things that I know a wide variety will like; that’s why I always try to incorporate music. Music is a part of normal people‘s lives. Overall, I enjoyed the editing project. I feel it was good practice, especially with the letter, for our digital portfolio and future jobs. I feel that I gave Briyanna efficient advice, and I think her revisions will help me to revise my newsletter for the digital portfolio.
ReplyDeleteTo begin this editing project I sat down and read through Grace’s newsletter once all the way through so that I was sure that I knew exactly what she was trying to say and the point she was trying to make. Once I understood what her newsletter was about I thought about what it looked like to me. I thought about whether or not I found the newsletter appealing to the eye. If someone presented a stack of newsletters in front of me, would I choose to read this particular newsletter? Although I came to the conclusion that the newsletter was professional and made a lot of good points, there could still be a lot of improvements that would make it even better and more appealing to a wider audience. With that in mind I went searching the web for color palates that are premade so I would be sure that the palate that I chose would not only be appealing but also remain professional. The Website I used is called www.colourlovers.com and I made sure that I gave clear concise details on my letter to Grace about the exact colors I want her to use. After taking care of the color palate I began to focus on the images that appeared on the newsletter and came to the conclusion that they needed to change. An picture of a set of students who are no older than fourteen years old is not an image that would appeal to an audience of eighteen to twenty-four year old college students. I also made sure to include that the image should still fit well with the image next to, to be sure one did not overshadow the other. Finally I got to the editing of the text. The content of the newsletter was very well written to begin with but there were a number of sentences that were either unnecessary or needed to be recreated because their structure was off. The last thing I looked at was use of punctuation. There was actually way too much use of punctuation and I marked where it should be deleted or rewritten. Overall I learned a lot from this assignment. I learned the symbols used to edit and I also learned a lot about my character as a writer verses another person.
ReplyDeleteSince editing is a part of the composing process that I like the most, I enjoyed this project the most out of the three we have completed in WEPO this spring. I had a chance to effectively manipulate existing ideas and polish an already well-written work and to me, that kind of finalization is satisfying to achieve as a composer.
ReplyDeleteMy process when editing Stacey’s newsletter on rhetorical situation was originally based in Sullivan and Eggleston’s piece, “Before you Begin” and then molded itself into my own process. I took the idea of going through the newsletter with multiple “passes” to be a good place to start when tackling the editing. In order to comprehend the full meaning of the work, I read the document about three times before I even considered changes I would make. I first started with using the proofreading symbols from the style guides and Sullivan and Eggleston’s piece and did the surface level changes in grammar, punctuation, and word clarity first. After the proofreading, I started to note places where I could make suggestions to change the audience. They were obvious to me considering the difference in tone each one commands. I learned through this process that the audience is really the most important factor to consider when writing, because it dictates how you approach writing about your subject. Basically, my second and third run through of the work dealt with the substantive changes I noted either on the side of the letter or in the detailed changes sheet. I included this sheet because, apart from my letter, I wanted to have a sheet the author could refer to which was organized and not crammed onto the actual newsletter. When writing this sheet and the letter, I found it useful when given the advice to “focus on three things—being concise, precise, and polite” (Eggleston). From there, I really solidified my style as an editor— organized, helpful and professional, yet not harsh. I also felt that the best way to present myself through the letter was a simple layout, that way my message would be the central focus.
In some ways, this project was similar to the newsletter and remediation because it dealt with presenting subject matter to a desired audience. However, this time around it was more of a top down process than a bottom up process. By that I mean that instead of starting with nothing and composing a piece from scratch like we did in the newsletter, we had to start with a product and take it apart, piece by piece on several layers (surface and content). It was more re-writing than writing. The editing piece also relates to the process of the remediation because each modified a past work; yet, there was more focus on correction in the editing project than creation.
In retrospect, the editing was much more time consuming than I had previously anticipated because each time I re-read the newsletter, I added a new revision that I had previously had not thought of. Because I had never formally edited someone else’s work, I think there was a challenge in me trying to get across my message to the author instead of simply changing something I had done myself. However long the project took, I am glad that I was able to experience a more realistic editing project than I had previously taken on, deadlines and all. Overall all, I will take away my new found process for editing and growth I have found as a composer and carry them on to other editing assignments.
To be honest, I loved working on this project. I like the hands on process that is involved with editing: the symbols, the red pen, etc. Back in high school, I used to love getting back a first draft from my favorite teacher and seeing my paper bleed. There was something about getting back a paper covered in red. Unlike previous English teachers that would just write a simple comment at the end to change a few things, Ms. Cox really made sure to turn us into better writers. I figure editing is a situation in tough love. You can’t become a better writer unless you are able to take criticism, and understand that one great piece may not be as great if you change the audience. The most difficult part of editing my newsletter is choosing weather to cut out something or not due to the new audience. I wanted to go for something more formal with the newsletter, which required a lot of changes. I mean, the newsletter wasn’t bad; it just needed a different feel—as I saw it at least.
ReplyDeleteThe processes of the remediation and subsequent editing were so very similar the more I think about it. When I taped my remediation, the one thing constantly on my mind was “audience, audience, audience,” and I found myself thinking the exact same thing when editing Tiffany’s piece. It doesn’t matter if the content is incredible, it doesn’t mean anything unless the audience is able to understand what you’re trying to say. As we do more and more of these projects, I become more engrained and comfortable with my theory of composing. (Audience—Exigence—Style) I hope to use the fine-tooth comb I used when editing this project and bring it to my portfolio when editing my own compositions.
I had no idea what to expect from this editing project. For all I knew I was going to be up burning the midnight oil hunched over papers with a magnifying glass attempting to find grammar mistakes. To my delighted surprise I sort of enjoyed this project. Blake’s newsletter had so many references to freshman and the EWM that most every article needed to be reworked in order to for it to appeal to the new audience. Some articles had to be cut altogether. This scared me at first and I began second guessing myself. Was this ok? Would he be upset? Then I realized that he was doing the same thing to my newsletter and I wouldn’t be offended if he was making it better. So I stopped worrying and got back to the task at hand. I was confused as to what exactly I should do with the newsletter and how I wanted to go about editing it. Should I keep it in his same format and simply move items around or should I uproot the entire project and put it into a new layout?
ReplyDeleteI decided that whatever I could edit in his original document I would and then simply provide an example of a layout that he might want to consider. I transferred some of his photos into a new layout to show him what kind of layout I was looking for. This seemed to be the most effective way to get the point across without making his original look like a battle zone of red marks.
In order to keep the original looking clean and easy to read, I decided to explain most of my edits with footnotes. I made minimal changes on the actual page, sans for a removal here and a comma there. Instead I simply put numbers next to the edits I wished to make and explained these numbers on a page that follows the project in my turned in packet.
Looking at my process compared to the first newsletter project, I realized how different they are. In the newsletter I sort of had 3 ideas that I attempted to do all at once until one stopped working, then I moved onto the next one. This project I took a step back and realized that this needed to be extremely cohesive so someone else could understand what changes I was trying to make. There could not be numerous editing ideas flying around haphazardly, it had to be clean and professional with an air of sophistication to it. Knowing that this audience was much different than when I did my other projects created a level of urgency. I knew that before I started I had to know exactly what I was going to do. This is something that is very foreign to me, but I rather enjoyed the change.
I enjoyed this project because I love to edit. It’s something that comes naturally to me. However I learned a lot while working on this project. First, is that it’s difficult to notice mistakes in an almost perfect paper, like Kayla’s was. Her newsletter was excellently written and there were very few errors. Another thing learned is how to use real editors marks. Even teachers don’t use them very commonly. But an editor is what I want to be so it’s very useful for me to learn them now. The process of actually making the newsletter and then remediating it was very different from editing someone else’s. Editing to me was a lot easier than creating a whole project. It almost seemed too simple. I enjoyed making substantive changes to Kayla’s newsletter since there were so few surface errors. I found it interesting that new ideas for changes popped into my head every time I read her newsletter, which was about four times. The only thing I would complain about is that there were very few actual words in her newsletter, and I didn’t have much text to edit. I would’ve liked more content and less images. I think this project had more to do with perfecting our first project rather than creating anything new. Almost like remediating only a lot less creativity involved. All of our main projects have been linked together, one building upon the next. I find that interesting and I like how the word we got assigned to us has been examined and reexamined throughout the semester.
ReplyDeleteWhen I began my editing project I was a bit overwhelmed. I had never edited someone’s work in a formal context. The only time I had ever been asked to edit a composition it was either one of my friend’s or my own. I felt that editing this project was extremely different from the newsletter and the remediation.
ReplyDeleteOver the course of the semester we have edited several assignments. When I was editing my newsletter about genre it was easier for me than Desmond’s newsletter about collaboration because I had a vision of where the newsletter was going. I fully understood the goal of my writing; therefore the revision process came with less difficulty. The remediation project was similar in the sense that I had created the comic strip, so I knew what needed to be altered in order for it to be effective. I took the good aspects of our first project, the newsletter, and put them into a new medium. For this last project, the editing project, I did not find the same ease I did when editing my newsletter and comic strip. The first step I took was to familiarize myself with the whole newsletter, that way I could gain an understanding of the tone and style of Desmond’s writing. Next I considered what would make the newsletter more suitable for the new audience. I could not decide how I wanted to organize my comments and feedback, but after some consideration I settled on typing the text in a word document and editing the lay out directly on the PDF. This was different from editing my own projects because I never sat down and wrote out the editing suggestions for myself. I just made the changes. I think that the process of editing Desmond’s work will be helpful to me because I think it is important to print something out and edit it. I looked at the work with a different eye, and I want to do that with my own work as well. When I revise my work from the computer I think I am too closely tied with the concept to change aspects of the composition that may need revision.
Although this editing project was a bit difficult for me because I am not the strongest editor, I was happy with the knowledge I took away from the project. I tried to tackle the project with the editing methods that we read about earlier in the semester. I revised line by line, paragraph by paragraph, and as a whole. I am going to take these skills and apply them to my future editing endeavors.
Throughout this semester, we've been assigned three main assignments that have focused on different factors of EWM. The newsletter project not only helped us learn about how to make a newsletter, it also taught us how to write for that genre. It allowed us to practice producing a product that incorporated images, words, and visuals to convey an image and hit a target audience. In the remediation project, we had to take our newsletter and remediate it into a new medium, keeping the basic information. This project, although difficult, was great practice for working in different mediums with the same information. It also forced us to use our imaginations and creativity. Finally, the editing project had us take a classmates newsletter and edit it to focus on a new audience. We were to edit not only the writing, but the newsletter itself, changing colors, visuals, and basically anything else that did not work for our partner. Each project was very different, but equally useful.
ReplyDeleteFo the editing project, I began by reading through Zeke's newsletter thoroughly about four times. After knowing what points he was trying to make and understanding the newsletter's purpose, I began editing grammatical mistakes. As I went through, things that I thought needed more instruction got a number which I then explained in more detail on the back of the newsletter. For Zeke, my main editing concern was helping him hit the audience demographic with more creativity. I believed he could do this by adding more interesting pictures, colors, and fonts.
The audience switch was not a big concern for Zeke's newsletter. This is because his writing was already geared towards an older audience. His newsletter did look more professional, but I believe that although the new audience included faculty, that does not mean the newsletter shouldnt be interesting and colorful. I took Zeke's writing and pasted it into a new layout with new colors, fonts and pictures that I thought would greatly help him. From there I edited the work itself. This helped me from having to comment on every visual element that I thought needed work.
For the most part, I enjoyed this project because I like editing. I enjoy helping writers and composers improve their work in a positive way.
I am proud to say I have conquered this editing project. Editing is not something I am fond of, and yet it is a necessary element of writing. When we were assigned the editing project, I really had no idea where to start, and to be completely honest, kept putting if off until I realized the first draft was due and I had to take some action. However, once I started, I put my Editor hat on and looked at the newsletter from a different perspective. I looked at it and made comments that I felt an editor would make. They were suggestions that needed to be changed for the different audience of the newsletter, but I had to do it in an authoritative way. I laid out specifically what the author needed to do, and it wasn’t as difficult as I thought it would be.
ReplyDeleteThe newsletter process was interesting because it was our first project and I was a little weary on how to approach it. It was hard because I had the word ideology and had to do significant research to get a grasp on the meaning and how it would fit into my project. Once I gathered all of my sources, I had a better understanding of how do write my newsletter in a way freshmen would understand. With the remediation, I knew I wanted to explore with imovie. Therefore, right off I started thinking how I could use the same concepts in my newsletter for the movie. I wanted to see how different students reacted to the word and how their professor’s ideologies affected them. It definitely forced me out of my comfort zone to use digital media for an assignment such as the remediation. But, I had good footage to work with and conveyed the message in a digital format. The editing project was just different altogether. It wasn’t as hard because I didn’t have to gather information and sources, but I did have to think outside the box when making changes and edits to another person's work. I realized I could no longer what I did in high school when doing workshops by saying “this was good, or I like that, or change this to a comma”. No, we were forced to actually make comments and suggestions that would be useful to the author. Also, with the readings we have done on editing I now know editing isn’t just about grammar or punctuation or being “nice”. For example, Sommers says, “comments create the motive for doing something different in the next draft; thoughtful comments create the motive for revising…without comments from readers, students assume that their writing has communicated their meaning and perceive no need for revising the substance of their text” (149). This was a breakthrough for me and really challenged me. With all three projects, the processes were very different. But the finished product resulted in me being able to explore different genres in the writing, editing, and media world.
The process of this editing project was much easier than that of the previous projects we have done. With this project I felt a little more in my element because I was doing something I have done many times before. I have edited every project I have ever done, and this time the only difference was editing someone else’s work. I really liked this project. This really made me feel like I was acting out the role of a real editor, and it is something I can imagine doing in the years to come.
ReplyDeleteThe first thing I did with this project was read through the newsletter. I read through all of the articles, and examined all of the extras along with them. From the very start I had an idea of what I would have done differently with this newsletter. I then read slowly through the newsletter line by line. I used a pink marker to make notes of things that didn’t sound right to me. After finishing the line by line editing I went back and read though it again. This time I used a red pen to make the corrections I felt were needed. I also made side notes letting the writer know what didn’t work for the new audience and which changes might be better. After I had gone through the newsletter multiple times and made the necessary markings I decided to get started with the letter.
The letter from the editor was something I have never done before. This step in the process of this project was the most fun for me because I got to practice what a real editor would do in the process of publishing a written work. The first thing I did was make a stationary piece and a header to write my letter on. I wanted it to show my personality so I used a feminine design in the four corners. I also used a header with my full name and information on top. In writing the letter, I wanted to keep in mind at all times that I needed to be professional and authoritative. I made sure that the writer knew that my suggestions were important, and that they would make the newsletter even better. I explained the changes in order from page to page, and as I critiqued his work I added notes on things that I liked about his newsletter.
Looking back at all of the projects I can see the connections they have. Each project was designed to help me learn the key components of writing and editing. In each project I was challenged to work with what I had learned in class while applying it to things that are commonly seen in the writing and editing world.
I found that beginning wasn’t that difficult as most of the work had been done for me- meaning I wasn’t generating a newsletter from “scratch”. However, editing someone else’s work was the difficult part because they were not my thoughts. The process for the editing project began with reading through the newsletter projects and trying to figure out places where I could insert a genre switch. I couldn’t understand how to keep the author’s voice while still performing the genre switch. As I began, I took the tools and resources available to our EWM class that included the style guides (and even Google-d some resources on how to edit online) and corrected some of the grammatical errors that appeared in my partner’s newsletter. I kept relaying back to my style guides to ensure that I was practicing good editorial skills, as well as learning form the guides (as I’m sure I was guilty of those errors as well).
ReplyDeleteAll three of the assignments required mostly the same processes. I began with research and collecting ideas on how to convey my ideas more thoroughly so that my partner (and if need be an outside reader) could understand our projects’ purpose and the end result. All three of the projects were evolutions of the project before it, and also required deeper thought. I would even go as far to say that these projects all added together were the exact same process that we would need to go through in the real world when creating a digital work. These connections ultimately made me appreciate the three projects for teaching me more about the process of creating a media composition than if I had not done them. This learning experience created a lot of good work that I am looking forward to using in my digital portfolio in the end o f the semester as well as submit to various schools I will be applying to in the fall.
This project has been the most difficult for me. I’m terrible at line editing and giving in depth advice when it comes to someone else’s work, especially when it comes to subjects that I may not have much of a background in. Usually what happens when I’m in an editing situation is an inability to find anything wrong with the piece, even on a grammatical level. With this project it was actually easier to find things to point out. I found errors and points that needed improvement in both content and the design of the newsletter. I think what helped with this project was the fact that I was reviewing the work of someone who is on the same level and in the same position as myself. I had to do a lot of meticulous work with this which made it the less interesting project out of the one’s we’ve had to do in the past and I discovered it’s not something I have talent for.
ReplyDeleteWhen comparing my process for each of the main assignments I would say the newsletter comes with the most time consuming process. The newsletter required me to put a lot of time into research, finding sources, and images, finding the right design and coming up with the right things to say and how to relate them to my topic (Rhetorical Audience) and to my readers. While not my favorite of the assignments, it was something I was actually very comfortable with as supposed to the editing assignment. The remediation was by far the most creative process out of the three assignments. I was using a program I am familiar with and I was working in a genre that I have worked in the past. The remediation had the most difficult begging of all three as I found it hard to decide how to approach it. When I decided to use an image as a way to convey my term I knew I needed a way to make it stand out and making the image abstract seemed a natural choice. The added animation came later when it was suggested in the revision process. Finding the right images to use was by far the easiest part to do in that particular assignment. The difference between the remediation and the other two assignments is that the newsletter and editing process are ones that deal with text and a much more structured kind of composing. While the remediation allowed for more room.
As mentioned before, the newsletter and editing project require a more strict text based kind of process and composition, this is where the those two assignments connect the most. The remediation shares a bit in the way of researching for material and ideas with the newsletter process. All three assignments have the consideration of the audience in common. They each require an idea of who the audience is and how best to grab the attention. For the newsletter it was the student body and for the remediation it was a wide audience. The editing project focused on both the writer’s audience and the writer his or herself.
My process for the editing project was much simpler than for the newsletter and the remediation of the newsletter. As far as similarities between the processes go, we had to consider the audience we were trying to reach, within both the letter and in-text corrections. However, I did not have to come up with my own idea for this project, and I felt right at home editing someone's work and making revisions and correcting grammatical errors. I could work on this project at my own pace; it was not rushed like the others before it. With the other main assignments, I had to think and think and think until I finally came to an inspiration and conclusive idea of what my project would be. The only part I struggled with was trying to be authoritative and direct without being mean or being nice without getting my point across. I struggled with this because I feel empathy towards other writers, and because of my own inability to take any kind of criticism. I did not want to overstep any bounds. I tried to only correct grammar and spelling within the text because I felt it would be disrespectful to point all the little teeny mistakes. I feel that as composers ourselves, we should not try to change everything unless it is absolutely necessary so that the content remains primarily the author's work and because there should be an element of respect for one another. With the remediation, I did not have to worry about being super clear or concise because it was my interpretation of the word. When it came to the newsletter and editing the newsletter, I had to be extremely clear and concise to be sure I reached the intended audience and that they could comprehend and follow the direction I was taking my edits or article.
ReplyDeleteSorry this is late, I had trouble getting my comment to post! Thanks!
"When you know who the reader will be, you can gauge whether the vocabulary, style, and depth of the material are appropriate or if different words, explanations or presentations are need" (Sullivan and Eggleston, 5) The process by which I edited this project started with the audience. I read the newsletter, keeping in mind that the target of this text was myself, along with all other students on our college campus. I also had to keep in mind the audience of my composer. Especially when it came to writing the letter to the author following the edit. This was difficult considering that the newsletter required a great deal of revision. I had to write for the reader. In order to compose, I had to have a preexisting idea of what I would want to read. I feel that in many ways, this is the process for every project.
ReplyDeleteInitially, with the newsletter, the instructions read "You will need to make sure your newsletter is something they would pick up and read and understand the significance of the key term. " The directions themselves required us to use our imagination in order to envision our final product.
Even remediation is transferring knowledge to fit a new audience. In order to change genres, it is necessary for us to have a new way of receiving information.
Imagination, interpretation of truth; these elements work together in order to shape language. Our definitions, however we mold for an audience, must still contain truth to us in order to be effective.
Composing and editing requires more character developement out of ourselves than professional acting. An actor must evoke emotion from an audience, but watching a movie, we as an audience are aware that actors or nothing but actors. When composing, our words must convince our audience that we are not acting. We must convince them that we are representing all that is true. They must feel that our understanding is reflective of theirs. This is the key to effective composition; the key to appropriate revisions; the key to reinterpretting media.
The process that I used for the editing project wasn’t really anything complex at all. Honestly I just did the work and turned it in. I started by printing out my partner’s newsletter so that I had a hard copy of it. After that I began to read the thing over and just look for the major stuff to fix. Nothing really detailed, just the stuff that obviously jumped out at me. Stuff like the color scheme and layout were the first things I tried to edit. The newsletter featured a wide variety of colors that I thought did not go well all together. There was a green and blue, as well as a black and gold color scheme. I thought that they did not go well together so I told her to choose one scheme and stick with it. The next part was just going through the written part of the newsletter and making changes there. Most of the work centered on helping adapt to the change in audience. She had several articles and sentences that were still aimed at college freshman so I suggested making changes so that it would appeal to all college students. Other than those changes most of the other work was just simply centered on basic grammatical errors. There were just some minor changes to make like awkward phrasing in sentences and a few punctuation errors.
ReplyDeleteThe process on this process was somewhat similar to my process for the other projects. The only difference with this one is that there was no creating involved at all. I was presented with a finished product and was only asked to make changes to it, unlike the other two projects where I had to create everything involved. That made this project easier to do for me because I did not have the pressure of starting a project from scratch. This project was also a lot easier to do because there were very simple steps to do. I found it very easy to just read someone else’s work and just make suggestions on how to fix it.
Let me start by saying this was not as hard as I thought, which also means that I am hoping I did it correct. But as far as this project went, it was very mind boggling for a moment, for I really do not like editing at all. I feel that for someone (especially me) to tell a person that they "suck" is a hard thing for me to do. I am the type of person that will do it for them, instead of telling them that it was not right. I do not have a problem telling people that they are wrong when they are; I just have a problem with nit picking at people for something that I feel like they put their all into and really felt comfortable enough to call it their final draft. I have learned that even finished articles, postings, newsletters, etc. can also be edited, for there is always room for improvement. So, that was the mentality that I had to pimp myself into thinking. I came up with this as I began to edit the newsletter, which was I am simply making this a masterpiece. Expounding on the simple foundation which is before me and do what I can and feel will make it a masterpiece. I have realized that these projects make you think about everything. From the audience to the genre to the tone in which you are portraying. Everything correlates for the growing as a composer and also in my case an editor.
ReplyDelete