Revisions whoohoo!

Revising work that you've already done can sometimes be very disheartening because you have put lots of time into your finished product. Standing back and looking at the big picture as a whole really helps to see flaws and errors that you may have not noticed while treading through the trenches of writing down the material. Going back over the research may also raise questions that you feel need to be answered to give your reader a better understanding of the point that your trying to get across. In the reading Ballenger talks about a boy who writes an essay on how families deal with alcoholics within the family. The reader was apparently confused about the purpose of the paper stating that it seemed more about outsiders influence rather than the family members themselves (Ballenger). It is very easy to get sidetracked while trying to convey one message and accidentally putting to much information on another aspect of the topic. This is where revision comes in handy. You may even be able to keep some off-topic info as long as it is blended well with your main point. Sometimes within an essay you'll cover one point and three pages later have a paragraph that is associated with the first. By revising you can get everything placed where it needs to be correctly to make more sense. The idea Ballenger gives us to highlight research material one color and our own input another is a great tactic to make sure we are evenly dispersing our thoughts throughout the research to combine both views in an effective manner. It's a little scary thinking about discarding any of the work we've done, but in many instances it is probably necessary to make our draft more complete. I guess we'll see where the revisions take us, won't we.

Last RR

It seems that the main point Ballenger is trying to make is that we should not be afraid to “attack” our draft. To many people, including myself, are afraid to make drastic changes to their essay; for me I think it is because I feel like I have spent days assembling my thoughts and am unwilling to undo all that hard work. But it will be imperative for me revise my paper, so that my ideas and sources flow. Making sure that I am “surrounding” my “sources” with my “own prose and purposes” is something that must be done (Ballenger).
When I recently went back and read my ethnography, first draft, I realized that it could use a lot of changes. It seemed that when I was first writing I was happy with all my hard work and how could I possibly change it for the better. According to Ballenger I was in to tight a relationship with my first draft and that it was time to take a step back.
I really like the idea of using two different highlighters; to highlight my purposes with one color and someone else’s idea with a different color. I am definitely curious as to how much of my paper is just facts or someone else’s idea’s.
Knowing how my leading question changed, from my first writings to present thinking, will give me an ability to begin honing in on revisions and even some rewriting of certain areas. I will have to reread my first draft, now that it has been a while it should be easier to see the actual theme and thesis that is presented. It may be easier as well to see it through the readers eye rather than the writers eye now. Ballenger suggests now is a good time to “get more specific about exactly what you're saying”. This will help me in my revision as it will bring to light what it is that I am actually saying.
I took Ballenger’s advice and had some friends read my paper, it was very helpful because they wrote down on the drafts that I gave them what they thought I was trying to say. I realized that what I meant to say, in some paragraphs, was totally obscure and would need some further explanation to get the point across.

Katy Kahla - CR RR

In this reading, Ballenger suggests different ways to reexamine and revise a paper. He especially emphasizes how we should be revising with a purpose and determining whether our paper’s purpose is clear with the supporting information surrounding it well organized. Ballenger also says that we can’t hold onto our first draft for dear life and say to ourselves that it is set in stone. Instead we have to remember that this is just a draft which requires us to let go of our preconceived notions of what we think our paper is like. Instead we should ask for feedback, whether it be feedback from a teacher or a fellow student, and use their advice to create a more polished paper. This concept sounds really easy, but as Ballenger points out this can sometimes require a major overhaul of your paper.

There are a few different reasons that a paper may need to have extensive revisions. One could be if all the supporting evidence in the paper does not support what your central idea is. In the example that Ballenger gave, a student’s thesis stated one idea yet his paper developed more into a tangent of that idea. Another reason for revision would be if there are too many facts and not enough analysis. Ballenger says that papers need to be a balance of both outside information and your own thoughts on the topic or it dry and boring to read. When examining problems that a paper may have, this can raise new questions that need to be answered which of course can lead to more research. This however is a good thing as it shows how knowledge of a source you are on your own topic.

Ballenger also suggests a few different ways to help revise a paper that I found useful. I really liked the idea of going through a paper with two different colored highlighters to see if there is too much source and not enough analysis or too much analysis and not enough sources. This really allows for me to be able to see where what I am saying could use some more backing or whether I am making side tangents at any point. Ballenger also suggest cutting up, cutting out, and re-stitching your essay. I think that this idea is great for when you don’t know where to go with revisions. This allows for you to do what you can’t do on a computer by allowing you to move around everything easier to create a better essay. Ballenger’s tips will be useful when taking a look at any of my drafts.

RR CR!!

In this reading Dr. Ballenger poses ways of revising a research paper. These methods seem like they would be very successful is implemented properly. I see that the excesses involving cutting up the paper and examine each paragraph as very effective. This seems like a great way to “cut the fat” from my paper. I know that both my papers need this to happen. My argumentative paper has some places where I’m sure their are wholes and missing data. So if I can do this exercise properly I believe I will have a clear view as to what needs to take place to have a strong paper.

The other activity that is mentioned is having someone else read and examine my writing. This is a very important thing, because it would be impossible for my self to read and scrutinize my own work. My eyes would be impartial to changing my own work. So with that said, I need to get into the writing center and have an upper-division student read what I have and more importantly what I need to change.

The third point that Dr. Ballenger gives that Is very important is that of going back into the library and doing further research. This is key for filling in those whole that may be found in ether activity. Once I have my focus dialed out I should with little difficulty hone in on other sources for my work. As long as I don’t create further issues with the data. As a writer you never want your work to be weak, unfortunately this does happen early in the process. So to combat that issue more data, and sources are needed.

As I side note I liked the part of the reading where Dr. Ballenger discussed the idea of friendly design. Especially giving examples with using things like block quotes, bullet lists, white spaces. This done in a way to make the paper “more inviting”.

kristen kuchay response to curious researcher

Ballenger’s explanation on revision is very clear and uses great examples to prove his points on what he is saying. I especially like how he compared your first draft to a long term relationship. As Ballenger says, you cannot completely re-due or change your entire paper because then your main point or purpose of the paper is abandoned (Ballenger).
When you revise your paper, you need to look at it through the reader’s eyes instead of just yours as the writer. As the writer, you need to understand your purpose, which is where Ballenger says is your starting off point, but also look at the purpose as the reader. Would you as a reader understand the purpose of the paper? You need to ask yourself questions when you are revising your paper to make sure your information is correctly in order, but also put together in a way that makes sense and the transition between information is smooth. Ballenger says you need to look at all the information you have after completing your first draft along with the new information you have picked up since then and compare it to when you began your draft and the questions you posed in that paper. Have any of the questions or main points changed? If so, how (Ballenger)?
Ballenger says one of the, if not the, most important thing you can get from the reader (whether it be your teacher or fellow classmates) is feedback and comments. This helps you as the writer go back in your draft and see where things might have been confusing and if you even understand it after reading it. Also, one of the best things to do is re-print your draft and make changes to it yourself after reading the comments left by the readers. This way, you can correct any errors or mistakes you made that maybe the reader didn’t catch but helped you take a closer look at a specific paragraph. Basically, you need to look deeper into your paper and compare the notes you have now on your topic to the notes you had when you first wrote your draft, along with what you had written in your first draft. Re-examine the main purpose or stance you had taken in the beginning of your paper and whether or not things have changed. If not, simply correct the information given and even emphasize more on it to make it more clear to the reader (Ballenger).

Op-Ed First draft

We didn't do it THEY did!

Truthfully, yes people can be irresponsible with their money. As well as people do make bad borrowing choices, by running up credit. However I respectfully disagree that that is the primary reason for our recession. With all this turmoil you cant ignore the fact that Wall Street has made some of the worst decisions of all. On top of that are the uses of our central banks, and the creation of money that we don’t have.

Due to the bad investment behaviors of Wall Street the FED has had to authorize the creation of billions of dollars in order to bail out the companies that have been deemed “to big to fail.” This is all because we don’t want to see another failed Lehman Brothers. Because the economy couldn’t have handled another failed firm of that magnitude the FED extended an $85 billion credit to AIG. The Economist explained weeks after that this was done because AIG posed a “systemic risk.” Even if the company will own almost 80% of AIG, it is because of poor investment choices that this bail out happened.

The investment tycoon Warren Buffett examined derivatives he called them “financial weapons of mass destruction.” The problem is that these financial companies have their derivatives market to exposed. The Last Resort explains that the failures sounding the sale of derivatives suggests that Wall Street has too much leveraged and too much capital devoted to products of questionable economic utility. So what he have is the sad truth that our financial system is becoming more dependent on the taxpayer. You and Me!

Op-Ed, Michael Mccormick

When the topic “green” is introduced in a conversation most think of recycling or hybrid cars. But, what is the real thinking behind “going green”?  Is it just to lower carbon emissions and pollution?  Or, is there a deeper purpose?
            When we think about saving the planet, what first comes to mind?  Is it buying eco-friendly products to save some far away place? I say that the underlying goal should be plant conservation. In a text called “Plants in Indigenous Medicine and Diet” Maurice M. Iwu talks about how food “contains many necessary and useful chemicals which help in the maintenance of optimal health”.  The problem therein lies with mass farming and the introduction of less nutritional food.  According to Dr. Holcombe, an Oregon based physician, eco-friendly farming produces eight times more nutritional crops then when compared to the same type of crop from a commercial farm.  That is not to say that commercial farms cannot be eco-friendly it’s just to say that most are not.  The future of Homo sapiens will be determined by the survival of genetic variability and nutritional content in our diet. 
            With the changes in our planets ecosystems, due to deforestation and the encroachment of indigenous lands, most populations are now suffering from eating a “civilized” diet according to Maurice.  The Igbo of Africa are a perfect example of once having an indigenous diet, but who are now suffering with an increase in their health issues.  Maurice says this is because first world nations are bringing in processed foods and encouraging them to buy modern varieties of crops.  He continues by saying that the Igbo are loosing their traditional uses of wild and domesticated crops and that they have not had thousands of years to adapt to digestively to new chemical compounds found in modern crops and processed foods.  I believe that it is critical to conserve plants and peoples use of plants.  If we forgo thousands of year’s worth of accumulated knowledge about plants and their conservation we as a species are threatening our very existence. 
            It is imperative that we expose our kids to the outdoors and teach them about conservation says Dr. Douglas a professor at Boise State University.  She continues that it is ignorant to treat plants with the mindset that they don’t affect you or me.  Even my textbook Biology talks about how New York City, New York saves billions of dollars each year in water filtration costs.  New York City opted for cleaning up and preserving the Catskill Mountains ecosystem, where they get their cities water supply; rather than building huge water filtration facilities to meet the EPA’s new clean water standards.
“Going green”, it appears, is not for the survival of the planet specifically, but for the survival of you and me. Plants have survived for thousands of years and through many dramatic events, is it not possible that they could replenish after the extinction of humans. We need to consider the behaviors of our ancestors, many of who learned how to conserve and live with their ecosystems, and adapt modern ways with ancient practices. What is your part in conservation?