Editorial Report

Did anything else change before I decided I was done? Yes, yes it did.

Rough Cut

After sitting down in class and learning that the rhetorical situation of a piece is of paramount importance, I realized that a new approach to my research was going to be needed. This revelation was further stressed by the research reports we completed as process work leading up to the creation of our rough and final drafts for each project. In the blog post entitled “My Sources” I was researching not only to find sources, but to find information about the sources themselves as evidenced by me delving into the author’s own background such as when I discussed an article “written by Peter Fairley, a freelance writer who writes almost exclusively on energy around the world, he writes for IEEE Spectrum, Nature, and MIT Technology Review” (Allred, “My Sources” 1). I even came to discuss the author’s potential bias while writing, noting that “he may be slightly biased on the subject as he argues for renewable energy in various nations across the globe such as France, Canada, and the United States” which is something that previously I would have never considered (Allred, “My Sources” 1). At the time I was certainly unhappy with all of that seemingly useless work that I was being asked to do, but now I have come to see that by looking at all aspects of a piece before using it in my own work I have a deeper understanding of what the author was really trying to convey with their writing. SOME TRANSITION

Edited Cut

After sitting through the first days of lecture and learning that that something as basic as the rhetorical situation of a piece is of paramount importance, I realized that a new approach to my research was going to be needed. This revelation was further stressed by the research reports we completed as process work leading up to the creation of our rough and final drafts for each project. In one of my first blog posts entitled “My Sources” I was researching not only to find sources, but to find information on the sources themselves. It’s easy to see me delving into these details like the author’s own background when I discussed an article “written by Peter Fairley, a freelance writer who writes almost exclusively on energy around the world, he writes for IEEE Spectrum, Nature, and MIT Technology Review” (Allred, “My Sources” 1). I even came to discuss the author’s potential bias while writing, noting that “he may be slightly biased on the subject as he argues for renewable energy in various nations across the globe such as France, Canada, and the United States” which is something that previously I would have never considered to be of any major importance unless a distortion of the facts was clearly evident (Allred, “My Sources” 1). At the time I was certainly unhappy with all of that seemingly useless work that I was being asked to do, but now I have come to see that by looking at all aspects of a piece before using it in my own work I have a deeper understanding of what the author was really trying to convey with their writing. When I’ve finished conducting my initial bouts of researching, it’s finally going to be time to begin putting words down on the page, the toughest part of writing.

How did the content change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version?

Well, there's now no more "SOME TRANSITION" which I don't think was a great way for me to leave the reader going into the next paragraph since it doesn't tell them anything.


How did the form change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the form is presenting the content more effectively in the re-edited version?

Once again the form didn't really change since for the most part I was just copy editing my piece, but it's still important to note that by adding a transition sentence I more closely follow the guidelines of an essay.