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”.
No comments:
Post a Comment