I quite agree with Franklin P. Jones who once said, “Honest
criticism is hard to take, particularly from a relative, a friend, an
acquaintance, or a stranger.” No matter
who it is, having someone mark up your masterpiece with a red pen is no
fun. Fortunately in these situations, one
also gets to be the one holding the red pen to someone else’s masterpiece. During the process of creating our QRGs, I
had the opportunity to peer edit Carrie
Belle Kent’s piece on the TMT telescope debate as well as Michaela
Webb’s piece on the Oak Flat controversy, while another student got to
evaluate mine. After reading the
comments and taking a second look at my own work, I recognized some key areas for
improvement.
 |
| McPhee, Nic. "Editing a Paper" 01/26/2008 via Flickr. Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic |
Audience
My classmates and my teacher will be reading my QRG. However, my audience expands past this group
to the general public. More than just
the people interested in human genetics, the aim of my QRG is to inform the
general population of an important technological advance and the benefits and
consequences that may come with it.
Anyone reading the QRG is expecting to be told why this
matter applies to them. Although my
writing has highlights of this expectation, it is not a main concern throughout
my entire paper. This is definitely an
area for improvement, as pointed out by my peer-editor.
As my controversy deals with technological advances of
scientists, one of my major roles is to provide clarity and explanation of the
science involved without overwhelming the reader. My writing covers this aspect thoroughly without
insulting the reader, as well as includes links for further clarification if
the reader wishes to know more.
Most people with a knowledge of genetic engineering will
presumably already know about the debate at hand. Therefore, my audience is mainly the common
man and using simple language will suit them best. In addition, the QRG should invite them to
the conversation, not scare them away with the possible dangers of the new
technology. Encouraging my readers to
take part in the debate as well as come to their own conclusions will greatly strengthening
my paper.
Context
This genre of writing demands to be easily read with
subsections that are easy to locate and allow the reader to skip around. This is achieved through white space and
organized formatting, something that my paper greatly lacks. In order for my text to be more reader
friendly, I need to focus on making it look less like an essay an more like a
brochure for Disneyland.
The content of my writing covers the major aspects of a well
written QRG, such as the event and background, the controversy, an analysis of
the debate, etc. However, my paper only
touches the surface of some of these topics and adding more explanation will
really help the audience make the connections they need to make to understand
the controversy.
Overall, my QRG takes into consideration the important conventions
of a QRG as well as how to properly include quotes and examples. The writing covers the essentials of a QRG
but contains room for more in-depth conversation. My voice provides a personal connection with
the audience that helps convey the importance of the controversy in the life of
the general population.
No comments:
Post a Comment