One of the limitations of sharing examples of a project written by a student with a class is that everyone then turns in nearly identical projects. Students take the examples as the only way to do the project, so they complete their work so that it looks precisely the same.

It’s like cookie cutter projects. The icing may be slightly different, but it’s obvious they are all part of the same batch. In fact, if you didn’t know better, you’d think they were plagiarized.

So today’s #WednesdayWrite is a challenge to you: Can you be creative? I hope so because your job this week is to brainstorm some ideas to get everyone thinking creatively.

Review the student examples from the assignment:

• Android Developer’s Example
• Packaging Engineer’s Example
• Real Estate Developer’s Example

Once you have a good idea of the information and design used in the examples, spend some time thinking about the ways the examples are very similar.

Next, it’s time to get creative. Add a comment (or reply to a comment here) with idea(s) on what could be done differently with the Analysis project to make it stand out as different and more creative. To help you think about the possibilities, consider these questions:

• Can you add details that are not part of the required information?
• Is there a column you can add that is unique?
• Can you think about the kinds of writing in a different way?
• What can you do with document design that will make your work stand out?
• Can you include something relevant in addition to your table of information?
• What can you do to “think outside the box”?

I will point everyone in the class to this post next week, and encourage them to find some ways to make their projects different from those examples.

Photo credit: Lego Man Sugar Cookies by Betsy Weber on Flickr, used under a CC-BY 2.0 license

Reminder of how today’s posts work
#WednesdayWrite posts ask you to consider how you would handle a specific situation in the workplace. As an example, you might consider an ethical scenario and discuss the various options available.
 

The Activity

Many of you have probably already seen the XKCD comic below, titled “University Website.” Beyond being a funny reflection on what you see on college websites, it’s a great example of what goes wrong when composers fail to think about what their audience needs. The people who decide what goes on these websites are meeting someone’s goals, but not all of the people who go to the site for information. I haven’t compared all the items in the comic to the Virginia Tech website, but I suspect that a lot of the details are quite true.

Permanent link to this comic: https://xkcd.com/773/

You can participate today in two ways: adding a comment that analyzes a university webpage, OR replying to someone else’s comment and explaining why you agree (or disagree) with their analysis. The details on the two options are below:

1. Add a Comment Analyzing a Webpage

Our activity this week is to complete a similar analysis of another webpage. Find a page on the Virginia Tech website, and compare what shows on that page to what you would look for when you go to that page. I have some guidelines for you:

• Choose a page that is in the vt.edu domain. You can look at a page for your major, a course, resources you use on campus, and so forth.
• OR choose a page that is clearly related to Virginia Tech, such as a page for a club, Greek organization, and so forth. If you’re not sure, send me the link and ask me.
• You may NOT use any page that I have written or that is about me. That just gets weird and awkward.

Once you choose a page, do this:

• Tell us the name of the page (for instance, English Dept homepage).
• Share the link in your comment.
• Talk about what you see there.
• Talk about what you think people would go there for.
• Draw some conclusions about how well the page fits the needs of its audience.

Finally, you are just making a comment. You’re not trying to write a formal comparison-contrast essay. Use short lists or fragments, whatever will make sense to people who read your comment.

2. Reply and Discuss Someone Else’s Analysis

You can reply to a comment someone else has made (or even several people if you want). Your goal would be to think about whether you agree with that commenter’s analysis and explain the reasons for your response.

Reminder of How Today’s Posts Work
#WednesdayWrite posts ask you to consider how you would handle a specific situation in the workplace. As an example, you might consider an ethical scenario and discuss the various options available.
 

The Writing Activity

Find the codes of ethic for your profession. For instance, an electrical engineer would focus on the IEEE Code of Ethics, and a biologist might focus on the Code of Ethics for the Society for Conservation Biology. Once you identify the principles for your field, consider the following questions:

• Where do you find principles explicitly related to writing or communication in the code of ethics for your field?
• Where are connections less obvious?
• Are there ideas about writing and communication that you think they are missing?

After you analyze the code for your field, share what you have found in a comment on this post. Be sure to identify your field and link to your code, and then talk about anything interesting or surprising that you found about writing and communication in your field’s ethical code. Alternately, you can consider anything that is missing from your field’s code.

Photo credit: Ethics CC BY-SA 3.0 Nick Youngson.

Reminder of how today’s posts work
#WednesdayWrite posts ask you to consider how you would handle a specific situation in the workplace. As an example, you might consider an ethical scenario and discuss the various options available.
 

The Scenario

The members of your writing group need to plan and write a short report on successful strategies for the job search. Your group has had two meetings in Slack so far, after which members have emailed and Replied to All, with everyone getting lots of emails with long threads about the report.

Two team members, Jasmine and Malik, are responsible for strategies for LinkedIn. Jasmine did research on what employers look for on LinkedIn, and she emailed her research to Malik without copying the writing group. Malik replied to Jasmine to ask a question, and he copied the other group members. Jasmine replied to Malik–not to all.

Malik is annoyed with Jasmine. He says they should be copying everyone in the writing group on everything they do so that people are in the loop.

Jasmine thinks they are drowning in email. She says they should only copy the entire group when everyone needs the information.

With whom do you agree? Why? Discuss with those who comment on the post.

Photo credit: Detail from Gmail – Inbox by Gustavo da Cunha Pimenta on Flickr, used under a CC-BY-SA 2.0 license.