WK6Assgn Welling T writing

I actually stand corrected; I did learn from this class. However, what I learned was not intended for me to learn. I learned to understand there are many different forms of academic writing which can be identified and processed not all that different from the rating systems and quality found in both tv and movie production.

There are some tv shows and movies which the makers hope will not get too much attention from the razzy awards. Razzies are that years pick for worst tv and film. Which includes films like Robocop which the audience was expecting x type of film but what the producers handed them was a part slap stick comedy and a gore filled horror film. The audience was expecting a serious action drama with some comic relief. When it was released, the film was a hit with the action and horror crowds but the film bombed with critics and serious movie fans. Why the audience was expecting x when the film makers intended y in part the trailers released made it look like a completely differnet type of film than what was presented. Academics is no real difference, is the audience expecting x or y. What is each author expecting when they sit down to write their article; are they expecting to write fluff a D list film or are they going to solid substance.

In addition, there is also the framework and structure of how much publishing and or working from published materials will there be. Some academics are very light on how much they further their academic works. Other scholars study all the time as if they are still in gradschool.

What is one area in which you have improved over this 6-week course?

I have improved in my comfort level at writing academically the way I do. At some point you just have to accept the nature cannot be fought against only redirected. However redirecting nature comes with a price. When possible best to simply go with the direct approach the nature and hope the community is accepting of it. Which does bring up some very interesting items and ideas regarding nature v nurture and the roman concept of the Janus schema which when a human has a flash (quantum field) of brilliance it is called Genius; from the root of Janus applying the ideas from janus j to g.

Explain your improvement and give examples.

I write in complex layers, detailed in the branches of academic connections, and of course long. Which from the example given last week, if you are a rolls engineer, do not waste time trying to reduce the engineering to a yugo. Engineers who built yugo’s need to do that, engineers who built rolls need to do that. Being punished for being a rolls engineer happens but then again, if and or when pushed for those types of actions and activities why is their opinion that important. Some criticism is simply nasty, not because it is designed to improve but the nasty person has an issue you can do things others cannot.

How has your Feedback Journal assisted in your growth as a scholarly writer?

the review was at least semi interesting. The input I received from the review was to try and remember those who do not like my packaging it is not me they are attacking they are attacking either my ideas and or their own theology regarding subjects which the evidence does not match what they think the evidence is.

How will you continue to track your growth and improvement as a scholarly writer?

In writing there is always room for improvements. Keep finding better ways to present academic ideas. Push the academics to improve the functions and structures of how information is presented.