http://www.instructables.com/id/A-Guide-to-Antiquing-in-Waco-TX/
Critique #3 Postmortem
1. With this assignment it took a lot less time, reading takes me a while so the fact that this was about two small paragraphs of reading made writing it go a lot quicker. I went and made a few changes to my paper Wednesday night after we talked about the paper in class, I also looked at my critique #2 to see what I needed to fix.
2. I finished my paper Monday night and then when we were allowed to make revisions I went back and changed a few things Wednesday night. I finished writing it pretty quickly and the rewrites took only a few minuets.
3. I was surprised we were supposed to go back and revise it without ever turning it in. I feel like in some ways it was helpful since we talked about it in class, and I realize that out schedule was crazy, but I think it would have been more helpful to know exactly what we need to fix after turning it in. I was also surprised that the video didn’t work, and the lack of material to critique. The papers we had been critiquing have been much more academic and long and this was like a poorly written blog.
4. The hardest part was probably the detailed summary, there was not much to talk about. The few things there were to talk about I had a hard time not ranting about in my summary and saving it until the usability section. The easiest part was the usability section because there was a lot to talk about,there were a lot of things wrong with the site and not a lot right.
5. Find something to compare it to, I was unsure of what I would compare it to other than a video that worked. If given the opportunity to go back and fix your work, you should take it.
Critique #2 Postmortem
1. The paper was very different from the first essay. The first one disscused a process and this one was just talking about an issue in science. I felt I found things easier to realte to in the first paper because i have delt with teachers grading my papers, but with this one I do not have experience in science and I don’t understand the culture as well.
2. I started this assignment yesterday at 5pm and finished it sometime at night. The writintg of the actual paper took about the same amount of time as the first one did. Reading this paper took me a really long time beacuse I was not familar with the activity the paper is concerned about, not to mention that it was sugnificantly longer, and honestly I keep getting distracted.
3. I was suprised at the lack of analyzing I had to do on this paper. If I was supposed to do more I was not aware. I felt like it was much more of a how do you feel about htis topic kind of response.
4. The hardest part of the paper was getting through the reading. It was not the most excititng thing I have ever read, and it did not help that I was not in the mood to read. The easiest part was my response, that is if I did it correctly. For my response I thought of examples of fraud and how they were handled, I endded up using two tv shows, I am not sure if that is considered an outside source, but that is how I understood the response to be.
5. I proofread each section of my paper as I finished it, and my roommate looked over my paper while we talked about it. I did not go to the writing center or get help from anyone else.
6. I would read earlier, but I would also find something to realate this too, esp if you are not in the scientific feild, it helped me and I would do it again.
MWA #3 Proposal
Game Day Food Favorites
A Baylor Bear’s Favorite Eats
-Vitek’s
-George O’s
-Health Camp
-Raising Canes
Antiquing Adventures
Places to find old cool fun things
– La Salle Shoppes
– Junk in the Trunk
– Cameron Trading Company
– Junk Queens
Picnic in the Park
Cameron Park’s Gems
– Miss Nellie’s Pretty Place
– Lover’s Leap
– Mouth of the Bosque
– Circle Point
Good and Bad Instructions
The project I picked for my bad instruction set was for a full metal sofa. http://www.instructables.com/id/Full-Metal-Sofa/
The instructions are not awful, but they could use some improvememnt. You get a clear picture of what your final product should look like, but the few photos he posted are in no particular order. There is not a set list of materials you would need, and no idea of the cost. When it comes to a cut list for the metal he tell you to come up with one on your own, I can understand that because you my not want to build as large of a couch, but I think a simple cut list like, you will need this many of peice A, could be helpful. He tells you that you need welding skills, which is good. He mentions that this project took him a week, i think it would be more helpful to know how many hours it took, because as a welder I do not see how it took him a full 7 days. He does not mention any age requirements and he has gone about this as a solo project, although I think a second person could be very useful. His instructions are in order, but they are difficult to understand, the writer is from Germany and his english is not the greatest. The instructions are not overly detailed i assume it is because he is expecting the reader to have a general understanding of welding. His building plans and measurements are very hard to understand and are really messy. When it came to the cushions he did not know much about how to make them, he had no upholstery background.
The project i picked for my good instructions was a pallet desk.
http://www.instructables.com/id/Pallet-wood-desk/#step1
At the start of the post he give a picture of the finished product as well as the original. He posts page by page instructions with words and pictures describing what the next step will be. He gives an idea of the cost of the project, and he lists matierials and tools you will need, he even lets you know if tools are optional. He posts pictures in order to show steps, while he gives you a general discripion of the step. He gives you a general cut list, but once again the measurement are missing. He also did not mention which size screws to use. He does not give a general safty warning but he does recomend a dust mask while sanding. I think a warning should be givin for tools as well as famable and toxic varnishes.He did not give any age recuirements and no idea of how long the project will take. He also tackled the project alone, a partener my be nice to have. The directions for this project are much easier to follow and to understand then the other project.
MWA #2 Postmortem
1. I feel like this was a simpler assignment in some respects. I found it easier to discuss the topic on this assignment, but at the same time I also found it harder to elaborate.
2. I started the assignment about four days before the original due date, but once the due date changed I put off the rest of the paper as well as the flow chart until two day before it was due. I finished the assignment last night, I was not expecting for the flow chart to be so time consuming. I started this paper earlier than I did the last one, I am very grateful I did because these past few day I have had a lot of other things to do and would not have been able to spend as much time on the paper.
3. I was very surprised at how long the flow chart took, theatre websites need to have a lot of information on them and I did not realize just how much until I was mapping it out. I was surprised that I had as many opinions about the functionality and design of the website as I did; it made those sections a little easier to talk about. I also felt like most of the sections of this paper were more straight forward then the last and did not need any further information then the facts.
4. The most difficult part was distinguishing between the different parts of the topic, structure, design, functionality, etc. The easiest part was the flow chart, it may have taken a very long time but it was easy to do.
5. When I began writing the second time around I went back and looked over what I already had before I continued. I finished writing the rest and had my roommate look at it and then I went back over it again, although we were very tired when we did it.
6. I would write the paper early again but I would finish and get it over with next time instead of dragging out the assignment, I find it difficult to continue writing once I have left something for a while. I would give someone else the same advice.
Abby Lee Dance Co.
analysis of chicken saddle site
The website http://www.mbldesigns.com/chicken_aprons.html sells saddles or aprons for chickens, designed by Marion LoPrinzi.
The woman who runs the site posted a message stating her inability to continue sewing chicken saddles at the time, she repeats this message from the top of the page, at the section for payments; at the end of the page however she still has a link to her email to place orders. For the most part the pictures the site uses relate to the product being sold, however the picture could be better in quality, but some pictures see out of place, like the dogs on the doggie treat page.
The structure of the site is not helpful to the user. Information is not easily accessible. On the tabs called “chickens”, “ducks”, “guineas” they say that they sell these animals, but do not give any prices. Some pages are presented in a table form, like the home decor tab, while ones like doggie treats are constant text and pictures down the entire page. It is difficult to tell when the site goes from a business site to a page about her own personal dogs, like on the doggie treat page.
The website is presented in 1st person, which is odd for a business site.
The design of the website is extremely lacking. The main menu bar includes tabs on chicken saddles, doggie treats, quits, egg art, and several other things, but each category does not have its own submenu bar. On the chicken saddle page you have to scroll down the entire page to navigate under the saddle tab. The general visual design of the site is almost non-existent. Text and pictures are not aligned in any specific way, fonts sizes are differing, which should be helpful to determine new sections of the page, but spacing does not allow that to happen. The pictures on the site are not good quality and do not do much to sell the product.
The functionality could be better, since so many graphics need to upload on one page; it takes some time for all the pictures to load. Some times not all the graphic would load on the page as I explored the site. All the links seem to work.
The site asks for audience engagement, but does not make it easily to do. She asks for pictures to be sent in to her by email, but you have to go searching the page for her email address. The site does not support user profiles, so there is nowhere for costumers to say their thoughts, unless they go through the site designer. There are no links to any related social media sites.
On the home page there is a link to the chicken saddle page even though there is a link in the menu bar right above it. The link http://www.ex-battery-hens.com about abused chickens opens up another badly designed site. Once people have sent her pictures she posts who sent them, it seems like she was trying to link to their sites, but links were not created.
MWA #1 Postmortem
Q- How did this writing assignment compare to other writing assignments that you’ve done in the past, either in English classes or other courses?
A-This assignment was a lot more technical. Most papers I have to write are fact and research based, or are based on my thoughts and understanding of a topic. This assignment was analyzing a work in a different way, less on content and more on format.
Q- When did you start this assignment? When did you complete it? How did this time frame compare to papers you’ve written in the past?
A-I started the beginnings of the assignment at the beginning of February, those assignments being a proposal of possible interviews and then the actual interview with the final interviewee. The writing of the actual MWA paper I didn’t begin until Tuesday night. Tuesday night I formatted my paper and organized gathered the documents for my appendix, I also wrote the first two sections of the paper, the overview and the biography on the interview subject. Wednesday night I continued my writing and finished with the genre analysis and conclusion. This is pretty typical of my writing timeline.
Q- What, if anything surprised you about doing this writing assignment?
A- I was very surprised at how stressed some people got about finding someone to interview. I used to do journalistic writing so the idea of conducting an interview never worried me.
Q- What was the hardest part? The easiest part?
A-The hardest part for me was annualizing each document, it isn’t odd to analyze writing but I was not used to doing such a technical analysis. It was very difficult to become invested in writing when I couldn’t but my options in it as often as I’m used to. The easiest part was the interview, all I had to do was ask and send in some questions.
Q-What was the process by which you proofread and copyedited your paper?
A-I looked over each section as I finished it and then I reviewed the paper as a whole once I was finished.
Q-What, if anything would you do differently on the next writing assignment? What would you make sure to do the same? What advice would you give someone attempting to do this assignment for the first time?
A-I might give myself more time to write the analysis but I would preplan my talking points again. I would give others the same advice.
Interview with DeAnna Toten Beard
– what is the most difficult part of your job?
It takes a lot of writing and revising to build an original scholarly argument as a professional historian.The most difficult part of my writing is staying patient and persistent in the slow work of building a long study.
-how do you go about proof reading and editing?
After I write a draft, print it and read it with a pencil in my hand. I see things differently on paper than on the computer. That helps me figure out what needs to be done next. I then edit, revise, and make the next draft. After a few drafts, I share the article or chapter with another theatre scholar (like Dave Jortner) or with a historian/scholar friend in another department. I am part of a professors’ writing group on campus that helps each other revise.
-what is the main purpose of most of the writing you do? Who is it intended for?
Most of my professional writing work is designed to be published for other scholars to use.
-how do you get into writing for theatre?
I learned how to write as a professional scholar through my PhD program.
-what types of writing you do as a theatre professional and which is you favorite? What have you written?
I write a variety of professional documents. Some of my technical writing includes reports about the educational program and curriculum at theatre programs around the country. I do this as a consultant and an accreditation officer for national organizations. I enjoy that work. But my favorite writing is for my own historical research. I write conference papers, journal articles, book chapters, and books. Here are some examples of my written work:
Book:
Sheldon Cheney’s Theatre Arts Magazine Promoting a Modern American Theatre, 1916-1921. Scarecrow Press. 2009.
Book CHAPTERS:
“Performance, Preparedness, and Playing with Fire: Major General O’Ryan and U.S. Military Theatricality in the World War I Era.” Public Theatres and Theatre Publics, edited by Robert Shimko and Sara Freeman. Cambridge Scholars Press, 2012.
“American Experimentalism, American Expressionism, and Early O’Neill.” Blackwell’s Companion to Modern American Drama, edited by David Krasner. Blackwell Publishing. 2005.
Peer-Reviewed Articles
“Susan Glaspell Goes to Law School: Adventures in Reading Trifles with Criminal Practice Students.” Co-Authored with Mark Osler. Texas Theatre Journal.
January 2008.
“Artisan to Artist: The Impact of Gallery Exhibitions of New Stagecraft in the U.S., 1914-1919.” New England Theatre Journal, Fall 2007.
“‘The Power of Woman’s Influence’: Nineteenth-Century Temperance Theatricality and the Drama of Nellie H. Bradley.” Theatre History Studies,
Volume 26. 2006.
“Our Town and Modernism: Thornton Wilder, Gertrude Stein, and The Making of Americans.” Texas Theatre Journal. 2006.
“Art as Theatre, Theatre as Art: Happenings, Environments and The Red Horse Animation.” On-Stage Studies, Volume 22. Fall 1999.
Non-Refereed Publications:
“O’Neill: The Experimenter.” The Goodman Theatre: On Stage, January-March 2009.
“Steele Mackaye,” “Percy Mackaye,” “Hazel Kirke,” “Elmer Rice,” “Street Scene,” “Adding Machine,” “John Howard Lawson,” “Processional,” and “The Voysey Inheritance” in The Columbia Encyclopedia of Modern Drama. Columbia University Press. 2007
Book Review: Messiah of the New Technique: John Howard Lawson, Communism, and American Theatre, 1923-1937. Theatre Journal, March 2007.
“Teaching Medieval Drama through Playwriting.” CD-Rom. MATC Pedagogy Papers, 2006.
“Conference Report: The Horton Foote Society’s Annual Gathering 2004,” Horton Foote Review, Volume Fall 2005.
“Betty Comden and Adolph Green” in Encyclopedia of Multiethnic American Literature, edited by Emmanuel S. Nelson. 2005.
Book Review: Female Spectacle: The Theatrical Roots of Modern Feminism. In Theatre Journal (Vol. 54, No. 4) December 2002.
Conferences Presentations:
“Girls in the Company: Elsie Janis, Cross-Dressing Dough Boys, and the ‘Regular Girl’ in World War I.” Mid America Theatre Conference, Minneapolis, March 2011.
“Sham Battles and Hot Work: The Theatricality of Major General John F. O’Ryan.” Mid America Theatre Conference, Cleveland, March 2010.
“Susan Glaspell Goes to Law School: Adventures in Teaching Trifles to Criminal Practice Students.” Co-Authored with Professor Mark Osler. Mid America Theatre
Conference, Minneapolis, March 2007.
“Father’s a Drunkard and Mother is Dead!: Theatre and Theatricality in the 19th Century Temperance Movement.” Mid America Theatre Conference, Kansas City,
March 2005.
“The Theatre Designer as Visual Artist: The Popularity of Gallery Exhibitions of New Stagecraft in the U.S., 1914-1920.” American Society for Theatre
Research, Philadelphia, November 2002.
“‘Pointing a Camera at a Pig-Sty’: Realism vs. The Real in American Criticism of the 1910s.” American Society for Theatre Research, San Diego, November 2001.
tyler karin. 