In this blog post I will be displaying my revision process. I will include the un-edited version along with the edited version in order to better explain/show my editorial process.
1. How did the content change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version?
In the re-edited version I added a small paragraph in order to more clearly explain/communicate the main idea of that section. It gave the listener a little refresher on the rhetorical situation as well as a small introduction so that they aren't lost when I really dive into the bulk of the piece. In the rough cut selection of the podcast I just went straight into explaining the rhetorical situation of writing an academic journal, but in the re-edited version I gave some context, which in my opinion effectively allowed me to communicate my information much more clearly.
2. How did the form change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the form is presenting the content more effectively in the re-edited version?
In re re-edited version I added a snippet of the Bear Down Arizona song when I introduced the professor that works for the University of Arizona College of Pharmacy. I thought that by playing the song it kept the listener more engaged. It just added another dimension to my podcast. It also helped establish credibility for both the professor that I introduced as well as the author (me).
No comments:
Post a Comment