Chapter8

Chapter Eight Response
Our group looked at concepts that Redish's presented in chapter 8, and compared them to our own experiences and backgrounds. Anna Matetic spoke about how Redish's concepts confirm her experiences in technical support and technical writing, and Kristine Wagner examined her concepts from the point of view of her preferred writing style in fiction.

Chapter 8 struck a chord with Anna due to her experience with technical writing. In technical writing, Anna had to break out content into chunks that gave information and were easily understandable by the users. Anna's users came to her information looking to take action. They wanted to learn about the software and its features. And they also wanted to learn how to use it. Anna found that one of the biggest dangers with technical writing for software is ambiguity – writing in a way that different readers can interpret instructions in a different fashion. If a user performs instructions incorrectly, they then have to go to the trouble to research how to fix the mistake. Annoying at best, in worst case scenarios this can involve loss of data or other problems. Well-written instructions are the first line of defense against errors.

On page 181, Redish discusses writing in active voice. In Anna's technical writing, this was rule number one. The IBM style guide she used actually told her not to use “should” or “would” because that implies that a user has the option to skip the step. With tasks, the user is following steps to take action. The language used in those instructions should reflect the fact the user is taking action. Thus, active voice is very important because it supports the action.

In addition, Anna also writes in as short a sentence as possible (Redish, 185-87). Saving a file takes three steps? Then each of those steps is a separate sentence in a numbered list. While it’s not always possible, she attempts to avoid sentences with “and” and other conjunctions. If words are absolutely not necessary and do not add to the information she is trying to convey, she leaves those words out. For example, we would not say “The process will complete and then you will enter the code.” We would say “Once the process completes, enter the code.”

In addition to technical writing, Anna provided technical support for almost five years. And she can say from that experience that ambiguous writing causes just as many problems as programming bugs.

Learning theory holds that to learn a concept, you need to learn two things: What the concept is, and what it is not. It's important to draw sharp boundaries between what it is and what it isn't in order to clearly separate it from related concepts and concepts you've learned before. If you want to illustrate how concepts relate, a Venn diagram is typically a good choice.

Kristine took a course in teaching middle school literature not long ago. She found the reading very slow going, and wanted to know why. Analyzing the writing, she found that it was very physical and concrete, very action-based, very sequential, and – importantly – it lacked coordinating conjunctions, and subordinate clauses.

Kristine thought that Redish is teaching us the exact opposite of what she found made it easy for her to read and comprehend novels. She was curious to know how the opposite applies to Redish's preferences for web writing.

In order to separate her theories of comprehension between fiction and web sites, she again examined Redish's recommendations in chapter 8, and found the goals to be:
 * 1) Help readers qualify themselves as needing to go through the sequence of steps as quickly as possible.
 * 2) Present a clear procedural sequence.
 * 3) Address the widest range of readers possible. Writing simply is not talking down to sophisticated readers.
 * 4) Use active voice.
 * 5) Avoid inconsistencies concerning: pronouns of address, pronouns web site authors use for themselves personally and for the company they're representing; use of active and passive voice.

The goal of fiction is to create interest and tension by not revealing the important developments or endings before they happen, but to slowly provide clues that shape the reader's burgeoning impressions. Most fiction follows [|standard stages of development].

The opposite is true in writing for the web: No plot development is called for. No building of tension. The more unscathed the nerves of the reader, the better. Everything is as laid out and predictable as possible. Explanations and sequences need to be as rationally built and smooth as possible.

Therefore, Kristine rests her case. She can state with assurance that she fully appreciates the value of what Redish presents in chapter 8. Fiction and web writing are 180 degrees distanced from each other. The goals and reader demands are totally opposite, and so are the writing styles and organization. In the case of web writing and reading, Kristine's love for coordinating conjunctions and subtle threads that slowly weave the threads of description, action and plot into a whole gives way to her insistence on deftly parsed meanings and telegraphically delivered sequences.

My Response:

What I found the most interesting in the discussion from this group on chapter 8, was their idea of learning theory. It reminded me of another writing technique that I learned in an undergraduate technical communication class on Rhetoric. This concept was simply to build on previous knowledge, taking what one already knows and using it to help explain a new idea. This works in tandem to what they have suggested, which is to show the concept by eliminating what it isn’t. The old/new theory takes a similar concept, which the reader is familiar with, and shows how the new concept is different than the old one. In this manner, it is using previous knowledge to help show what the new idea is.

I also found the idea of the opposite nature of fiction writing and web writing. In fiction, words paint the scene, and set up emotions while building character. I do not believe that they are as different as this group makes them out to be. On the internet a good writer can use these same devices to get their point across, although they have very little room in which to do this These writers have to rely on different methods. In the chapter, Redish calls the writing for internet like a conversation, short, to the point, but still warm and inviting, much like well written fiction. The You/We parallel works well to achieve this conversational tone, as it is not impersonal sounding as other pronouns would be in their place.