Double Take

I would say the biggest thing I have noticed about my pieces is a few "What the heck was I trying to say?" moments.

It is nice to have a break in between final rough drafts and the final revision, that way I can separate myself from the writing. It seems that regardless of how many times I actually re-read these two pieces, my mind kept saying, "it sounds great, nothing else to fix". Now that I have had some down time, yeah...um, they still could use a small amount of work.

The profile piece just needs a few things fixed and the layout played with. The feature piece needs some argumentative adjustments and just smaller spacing as if it would appear in a magazine.

I seem to be struggling with how much of 'me' I should add to the profile piece. I don't want it pulling away from the true scientist, but I was there for some of the data collection the piece talks about...ugh.  I guess that's part of the process, try something and if that doesn't work...try something else.

Revision Plans

The two pieces that I plan on building up and adding to my portfolio will be the profile, and feature article.

I guess the main reason is that I found these two pieces to be the most interesting, and fun to work on. The SNB was still enjoyable, but these last two projects were the ones that really stick out for me. I enjoyed the interview process and also the research that went along with both projects.

Even though I knew what what my topics would be, I feel that I walked away being more educated on the topic. As the writer, I wanted to inform my audience about the subject at hand, but ended up teaching myself along the way. That was a pretty cool feeling in itself.

For the portfolio, I plan on going back over each piece and really weeding out things that need to be deleted or just 'tweeked'. I think it will help since there has been a time lag between the last time I have sat down and read them. Now when I sit down to work on them, I can find things that might not even make sense to me, even though I wrote them.

Profile piece: mainly tweaking a few things per feedback suggestions, adding more technical detail where needed on the actual science being done. Also want to make sure it educates not confuses the audience. I just don't want to leave any details out (or in) that could be left open for incorrect interpretation.

Feature piece: adjusting things per feedback suggestions, adjusting layout so it looks more like a magazine ad (I have double spacing right now, mainly so it would be easier for me to read the comments, will drop it down to 1.something, so it looks more magazine style). The last thing I want to double check (just like my profile piece) is make sure I haven't left any thing open for incorrect interpretation. I want the reader to walk away just understanding the video game morality issue, not feeling like I am leaving tons of unanswered questions.

I am hoping that since there has been time away from these projects, when I sit down to revise them for the final portfolio, it helps me see any, "What the hell was I meaning by that statement?"

Breaking the Rules

I would have to say the biggest thing I remember about science writing...it was meant to be just the facts. When dealing with this type of writing, it needs to be 100% factual, but I was taught that science wasn’t really written in a fun way. Science experiments were the fun part, but anything we wrote about was typically boring. The one thing that really impresses me about the writers and the stories we have read to date, is the ‘fun factor’ they have put back into the science. The biggest task I see for each of the writers is how they approach the audience. Are they going to start out with a simple story, or jump right into the complex calculations, and are they going to balance it out with some humor? Each one of the pieces we have read seem to have found some kind of balance that takes the reader onto a journey of the facts, but in a ‘light and  easy to understand way’. Even though some of the pieces have still been wrapped around the complex world of physics, the writing has been laid out so the science itself is more manageable.

With passive voice, it seems you would want to use it more in science writing when the object of the action is more important than the person performing the tests or study. For the audiences, the end results are what they care about, not the people running around in lab coats. We do care what training and such the testers/scientists have (background), but as a reader, that might not be as important as to what is taking place. I personally don’t care to know who is testing a car I want to buy…I want to know WHAT was done to the car to test it.

Final project ideas

I have a few ideas that I am tossing around...

The first one is based on JP's video game violence idea. But for my project, I would like to research the moral issues of video games. A couple weeks ago I was playing Modern Warfare 2, and the game goes back and forth between playing the 'good guys' and the 'bad guys'. When I am playing the 'good guys', I cannot hurt innocent bystanders (women and children), but when I am in the shoes of the 'bad guys' holy hell, I can blow up, shoot, stab, etc...anyone and everyone. Why is that? We know there is violence in video games, but there still seems to be a 'code of honor' when it comes to these shooter games. Good guys don't hurt innocent people? Or is it just the Americans?

The second idea, would be BPA...I know its a boring topic, but as a parent and consumer, this crap is in pretty much everything. I have done research on this before in a technical writing class, but I want to keep exploring what has changed if anything has changed.

A third idea would be to research drug problems right now in our armed forces. I know the Air Force has been dealing with soldiers "dusting" (a drug that doesn't show up in tests). The Army has faced major criticism from drug allegations. It is this side that I want to research to see if again, anything is being done to curb the problem.

The magazine that I would love to see this in...TIME!!  (If you gonna aim high, shoot for the Moon!)

Science Profiles

I guess out of all the profile pieces we have read, the best one (for me) was Oliver Sacks , "Uncle Tungsten." The main reason that I liked it was; as I read the story, I felt as if I was right there in the office/workshop. Sacks did a great job of writing about the work, but also making the readers feel as if they were right there watching it happen.

For my piece, that is what I am shooting for, that my audience feels that they are in my shoes, doing the work, and actually see whats taking place. I want to create the feeling of inclusion from the reader, but make sure they understand the 'why' and 'how' behind the science being done.

As I read "Uncle Tungsten," I could actually visualize myself being there and watching everything taking place. I kept looking at my wedding ring, because it is made of tungsten also. I not only found the profile piece to be interesting and entertaining, I found it very educational. I knew tungsten was very hard, but never knew why it never looks tarnished like gold or platinum. In that aspect, I thought the story was really cool!!

It will be interesting to read other pieces just to see how we each approach our project. I want to make sure mine is a fun paper, yet one that will educate as well as entertain.

Thought the emergency removal of a tungsten ring was interesting....


Finger rings made of extremely hard materials (tungsten carbide or ceramic) can only be removed by cracking them into pieces with standard vice grip-style locking pliers. Standard ring cutters will not be effective (Figure 1).
  
Place vice grip-style locking pliers over ring and adjust the jaws to clamp lightly. Release and adjust tightener one-third turn and then clamp again. Repeat until a crack is heard, and then continue clamping in different positions until the hard material breaks away.

Take care not to slide or rotate the cracked ring on the finger. If the ring contains an inlay of gold, the exposed gold can then be cut or clipped in the usual fashion (Figures 2 and 3).
  
Return larger pieces to the owner because they may receive a replacement from the manufacturer.
  
Stanley V. Hajduk, MD

Interview project questions and such

For my interview project, I am going to interview my father-in-law. He is a retired fish biologist who runs his own consultation business. The work he has done revolves around protecting fish habitats and populations in rivers and streams throughout the United States. His current business lets him still keep active with the fish protection side, but he has also worked with developers and land owners when placing wind turbines. It’s not really fish related, but his science background allows him to get bird studies and also plant and wildlife counts. His connections over the years, has him working with conservation groups such as: Advocates of the West, and Trout Unlimited. I have worked directly with him on a few projects, so I will able to put a lot of my own experience in this piece.

 

Here are the questions I have asked him so far:

1. What is your professional title?

2. What types of classes did you have to take in college?

3. What made you decide on your career path?

4. What is the main purpose for you career? (what do you do when working)

5. What types of companies or departments have you worked in?

6. What would you say has been your biggest/proudest achievement?

7. Now that you are retired, what types of projects do you still work on?

8. As much as you love being retired, do you honestly ever see yourself not having an active role in the field? (do you ever see yourself just saying to ‘hell with it’ and not taking on projects)

 

9. Environmental issues are important, but can you explain why water quality for aquatic life is so important?

 

10. Have most of your projects been government affiliated or have there been more private projects? (like the Sun Valley stuff we did)

 

11. When in the field, what exactly is being done? What measurements? What data is being collected?

 

12. Have you ever had to use your professional knowledge for legislation purposes?

 

13. Where have you done your work? (Different states or exotic locations)

 

14. What advice would you give to somebody who was looking at getting into the field?

 

15. How important is science writing when it comes to your profession?

 

16. I’m sure the math is the same, but have you noticed a large change in the technology being used?

 

Weekly readings

I would say that the reading that I enjoyed the most was "Sign Here If You Exist." Of course the main reasoning was learning about the wasp and its relation to the world around it.  I did like the way the author kept going in and out on personal reflections of her own mortality. The only real problem I had with that is, I just can't truly make the insect to religion connection.

 
I understand how and why she did the format she chose, just still unclear of the connection. I didn't grow up going to church, and I don't believe a lot of what the bible says, so maybe its just me and my own personal experiences with religion that is making the mental connection more difficult. (I just don't see a bug dying as a way for me to re-evaluate my own life.)

Growing up we learn that humans are the sole species at the top of the food chain, but like the author points out...how can we claim to be the tops, when we are also being eaten? It was nice to actually read that and put it into perspective, that maybe we are not all that special.

The author really made me think about my own eventual death. We know that we are born, we live, and then die. So many people spend all their lives worrying about dying that they don't enjoy living. Which is a shame....life is way to short to worry about something we can't prevent anyways. We can play it safe, but enjoy life at the same time.