Response to Quick Review Chapter 31

This chapter of Quick Review held a lot of information about plagiarism. I liked the various solutions to avoiding plagiarism that the reference supplied. Once again, I had to learn to give credit to the people and works I used in my Broadcast Journalism class. We generally used the tactic of simply putting the site or person's name into the sentence we were working. For example: According to BBC News, this statistic...etc. I'm interested to learn some of the other ways to give credit to sources, like using quotations or citations. I've never really learned to properly cite a source before. I've always found other ways to integrate my research into my papers and other things.
I really liked how thorough the reference was in this section. I found the examples to be very helpful in understanding what the book was talking about and how to properly apply these concepts on my own. I especially liked the table of useful verbs for summarizing, another skill I haven't really practiced before.
Overall, I really don't agree with plagiarism. I have written pieces before and would be enraged to find out that someone was claiming my work or ideas as their own. I'm glad that I have such a good source to show me how to avoid doing that by mistake. I have no problem with giving author's their credit.

Response to Quick Review Chapter 30

This chapter was primarily about how to search the web. I feel I'm pretty well versed in this, having done a large percentage of internet researching in high school. This chapter did introduce to me the idea of subject directories. I never really knew that such things existed in Google or other search engines. I can see how they would be incredibly useful in a search that resulted in a lot of spam websites at the first pass. I wonder how widely used this directory is. I've never even heard of it until reading this chapter. I'll have to give it a try on my next internet searching adventure.
This chapter also covers the differences between reliable and unreliable website sources. Generally I've tried to be very aware of this distinction. For example, through trial and error I've learned that Wikipedia is useful when you're trying to find out something general about a subject, just out of curiosity, but it is a very unreliable source when it comes to writing a research paper or a radio story. My old Broadcast Journalism teacher outlawed the citation of Wikipedia very early on in the course. Generally now days, I try to only take facts from websites that I've heard to be reliable, or ones associated with a organization or person I trust. For example, I might not believe something I found on Wikipedia until I saw the same factoid in an article on the CNN website. Through writing stories for radio I also had to become aware of a website's bias and learn to read between the lines. I also became an expert at finding sites with a counter-bias, so that between the two I could understand the real story.
I feel very confident about the topics discussed in this chapter, though it was interesting to learn about the search directories.

Response to Quick Review Chapter 28

While reading this through I recognized a lot of elements I've already used before in writing research papers. For example, the specific ways to get a good interview. I feel I've used this many times in both my Broadcast Journalism class and high school English classes. The only thing I found surprising was the comment made about not depending on a recording. In the past I have always asked for a recording and usually got the interviewee's consent. I guess in the future I will need to be more precise in my note taking during interviews.
The other thing I found different from my already existing methods were the different search strategies. In the past I have always used all possible outlets, including books, articles, the internet, and people. I've never really systematized it before. Honestly I'm not sure if it will help me. I've always found my way of researching to be pretty effective. It lets me stumble upon things I wouldn't have otherwise found.
The last thing in this chapter that I haven't encountered before was the idea of an annotated bibliography. The bibliographies I've done in the past have simply been there to cite my sources. I kind of like the idea of having a few notes on the source to explain what the source was really about.
I think I will definitely use some of the new techniques I came across in this chapter. Even though it hasn't been my style in the past, I can see how doing a research paper in a more organized and systematic way would be beneficial to both the research paper and one's sanity. I will look forward to using a more organized search strategy and trying out the annotated bibliography. Research papers have always been a little tricky and I'm glad to find new ways to make it easier.

Responses to "Writing about General Apache" and "Simplicity"

Response to “Writing about General Apache”

When I first picked up “Writing about General Apache” I was a bit skeptical. I didn’t understand how hearing about a professor’s struggle to write about his student was supposed to matter to me. A reflective essay is supposed share an experience that will benefit the reader, but this sounded like a piece written to express frustration. As I read the essay, I found it enjoyable all the same. Harrington wrote beautifully about his student. I enjoyed the little details he put in, the story about learning the streets of Washington DC from a homeless man, for example. These little details made you care about Harrington’s student, made you want to know his story. Though almost the entire essay was in the past tense, the quotes Harrington included really helped the story feel more alive and true. I think that fact that Harrington wrote this essay after writing the poem and sharing it with his student really made the essay better. You could really feel the sense of looking back. Harrington looked back not only on his writing process but also at the life of his student. It allowed him to slim down all the event and stories into one concise piece that wasn’t too long for the reader or too filled with unnecessary details. I especially liked the ending of the piece. The whole essay was kind of a buildup to the poem. Adding the poem at the end satisfied the reader’s curiosity and reinforced the importance of the subject matter. I don’t think I could put what I got from this essay and the included poem into words, but I did come away feeling a sense of understanding, and that’s what counts.

Response to “Simplicity”

William Zinsser has an incredibly valid point. I really enjoyed reading about his policy on written language. I totally agree that writing is hard work. I find myself doing a lot of the things he talked about. Not knowing what I want to say is probably the biggest thing for me. I like that Zinsser made the point that writing and thinking clearly isn’t something you’re born with, but something you have to work at. He also really put into perspective what writers are competing with when they try to catch a reader’s attention. He made great points and exemplified those points in his writing. I found it enjoyable and informative.