Re: PB&J--not just for lunch anymore (was: Getting Experience --was Volunteer TW Services) -Reply

Subject: Re: PB&J--not just for lunch anymore (was: Getting Experience --was Volunteer TW Services) -Reply
From: Deborah Ray <debray -at- RAYCOMM -dot- COM>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 11:23:16 -0600

At 11:43 AM 6/26/98 -0400, you wrote:
>
>I agree, Deborah, it is a good exercise that the students will remember, =
>*but* (like a certain Physics discussion) I believe it=27s unrealistic.
<SNIP>

>Think about this. A writer *has* to make certain assumptions. If writing =
>for an English speaking audience in a country where the minimum-wage =
>workers can afford a jar of Peanut Butter (and that=27s tough sometimes), =
>it can be *assumed* that the reader will *already know* that they have to =
>open the jar to get the peanut butter out.

Good point. Usually, after the exercise, at least a couple
students bring this up--so I pose the questions:
who is the audience, what do they know, what do they need to know,
etc. I get a variety of answers, of course, and we talk about
how/why the details would be different for each audience mentioned.
I further illustrate why audience analysis is important by having
a few of the students read their instructions aloud. In this case,
students can hear the variety of details provided
based on a person's idea of who the audience is. Yes, the
exercise is somewhat unrealistic, but it effectively makes the
points about analyzing your audience and choosing details
accordingly.

Last time I did the exercise, I brought a loaf of bread
that was double-wrapped--that is, it had cellophane and a
bag. At the beginning of the exercise, I mentioned that students
were encouraged to come up and examine the materials before
they started writing. Nobody did and, therefore, nobody caught
the double wrapping. In this case, even students who included
the detail about opening the bag missed the detail about
opening both bags. Okay, so perhaps most people would *know* to
open both bags, but it's a good lesson in knowing your
materials.

Other lessons:
* We examine how students designed the instructions--some
do a numbered list, some do a paragraph, and some do a
bulleted list. We talk about dos and don'ts.
* We look at the BP&J building processes--that is,
some students put PB on both pieces of bread and some
only one piece, and so on. This poses the question, "what *is*
the "correct" way to build a PB&J sandwich," which then
leads to discussions about knowing the process you're
documenting, knowing the goals (specifically as well
as generally), and striving for complete technical accuracy.
* We look at articulating a process--getting them to coherently
articulate how to join the two slices of bread together
is usually pretty comical!
* We look at the overall structure of instructions. In this
case, we look at telling readers what they're about to do
(You are going to build a PB&J sandwich...), what they're doing
(Steps for building a PB&J sandwich...), and what they've just
completed (Your PB&J sandwich should look like Figure 1...).
* We discuss the role of graphics in instructional docs--
how they can improve communication, hinder communication,
etc.
* We talk about the idea of "given the chance, readers will
misunderstand/misinterpret what you write." This is where
my being deliberately obtuse comes in. Sure, most people
will know to open the lid or bag(s), but it points out how
very careful we must be to ensure the reader understands
and can complete a process based on the information we
provide.

<Gosh, there've been so many different side discussions
I've had as a result of this exercise...but I'll stop here.>
Of course, not all these discussions occur within the one class
period, but I frequently refer back to the exercise
and pull examples from it.

I think I like this exercise because it *shows* students
how much planning, thought, and details instructional
documents require. Plus, it shows them the results of
instructions that are inadequately developed--regardless
of exactly why they're inadequate. You're right that it
mostly illustrates the necessity for audience analysis,
but inadequate audience analysis can lead to so many
different problems worth discussing....

Thanks for your comments!
Deborah




Previous by Author: Re: PB&J--not just for lunch anymore (was: Getting Experience -- was Volunteer TW Services)
Next by Author: Re: online doc vs hard doc
Previous by Thread: Re: PB&J--not just for lunch anymore (was: Getting Experience --was Volunteer TW Services) -Reply
Next by Thread: Tech Writing Position: Long Island, NY


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads