5 ms·

"As a result, I have recently instituted a one-point penalty on every assignment for infractions." These were always the worst type of teachers. When the major

by n0us 11y ago

"As a result, I have recently instituted a one-point penalty on every assignment for infractions." These were always the worst type of teachers. When the majority of students are telling you and insisting that you are wrong, you are most likely wrong. This is especially true when they are able to provide a justification for their answer. When a quote is used it is my firm belief that what goes inside the quotes should be a literal copy of whatever you are quoting. A full stop or a comma can in some cases modify the meaning of the quote and should not go inside the quotes because it makes the meaning of the quote ambiguous. For example if I used the above quote at the end of a sentence it would be unclear if the quote itself contained the period or if the period was just there to close my sentence. Grammar has changed significantly over time and will continue to change. The argument that "that's the way we do it" doesn't hold water in my mind. It was a poor way of doing things to begin with so we should change. </rant>

nkurz 11y ago
I tend to agree with you, but I'd like to understand better the mental process that leads him to penalize students for an approach that he concedes is logically preferable. My guess is that he thinks he's doing them a service by showing them how their writing will be judged "in the real world". Perhaps someone who agrees with the author's approach can offer better insight?
- ldmoray 11y ago
  The author teaches courses on Journalism. Agree with the logical style all you want, professional journalism is written according to style guides, and those style guides more often than not dictate American Style punctuation. In this case, "the real world" includes the newspapers his students wish to end up employed at. In the case of a professor taking marks off for punctuation issues when writing essays on history or economics or engineering, I agree that's wasteful.
  - jdietrich 11y ago
    The "real world" of journalism is now highly globalized and casualized. Young journalists should expect to work for a large number of publications as interns, freelancers or short-term staffers. In this climate, adaptability is a core skill. It is perfectly appropriate for an instructor to specify a style for an assignment and grade accordingly. Dogmatically teaching only one style is outmoded and actively harmful.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- mturmon 11y ago
  A pugnacious case for this position ("doing them a service by showing them how their writing will be judged") was made by DFW in his very long essay on English usage [http://harpers.org/wp-content/uploads/HarpersMagazine-2001-04-0070913.pdf http://harpers.org/wp-content/uploads/HarpersMagazine-2001-0...]. See the bottom of page 53, or see just the basic excerpt at: https://www.reddit.com/r/SRSDiscussion/comments/xp3i4/race_and_language_in_authority_and_american_usage/ https://www.reddit.com/r/SRSDiscussion/comments/xp3i4/race_a... . DFW, who of course did teach writing, got significant pushback in the letters the next month. There's no winning this particular debate.
ianbicking 11y ago
I would have loathed this teacher as a student. Fifteen years later I kind of get it – maybe it's right or wrong, but there is something to be said for writing to your audience and your medium. And papers written for this guy should use illogical punctuation. Probably writing code and doing code reviews has increased my sympathy: I frequently reject code that uses a style I might theoretically prefer, but which is not consistent. This can add some tedium to reviews for both parties. Of course since it's a one-way non-discussion point penalty that will possibly affect your permanent record, it's a little annoying, but that's just the shittiness of school.
- n0us 11y ago
  If I were in charge of reviewing code for a coworker I might object to their coding style as a matter of preference but if they were able to provide a reasoning for their position then I would "pass" them without requiring them to modify the code. This is the type of instruction the does not teach critical thinking that is crucial for success in higher education. Instead it teaches the student to memorize the book no matter how wrong it may seem. It also teaches them that the authority in any situation has the absolute ability to determine what is right and wrong, not that one style might be appropriate in some situations and inappropriate in others. If I were writing a novel, I might use the illogical American style because I don't anticipate quoting other individuals and having to convey their exact meaning. In philosophy courses I struggled with this because professors would request that I quote exactly, but also request that I put the period inside the quotes. As a result the style of the paper and the readability would both stuffer while I was stuck putting in more effort to disambiguate what I was trying to say when it could have been done in a simpler manner. The solution was often block-style quotes at the beginning of a section and references back to that section, or direct references to a page and line no. in the book.
rayiner 11y ago
I think camlCase is stupid. I prefer the traditional c_unix_form. But am I going to go into a camlCase codebase and start putting underscores everywhere because I think they're better?
- Lawtonfogle 11y ago
  If we were writing a group paper, this may apply. But you would choose to use c_unix_form on your own projects, no?
  - rayiner 11y ago
    But in the real world, you're usually going to be writing in a context where your writing will be read alongside work written by others. E.g. a corporate report, a newspaper or magazine article, etc. If you're writing a novel, sure, do whatever you want.
wpietri 11y ago
I was with you until here: "'that's the way we do it' doesn't hold water in my mind." One way people can mean that is pure exercise of authority. "My way or the highway." I agree that's bunk. But there's another way to mean it. Take driving on two-way streets. It doesn't really matter which side we drive on; driving on the right works just as well as driving on the left. But it matters a lot that we pick one and stick with it. Why do Americans drive on the right? That's just the way we do it. As somebody who used to do page layout, I appreciate the convention of putting punctuation inside. As a programmer, I appreciate the convention of putting it outside. Neither is "wrong"; they're both fine ways of dealing with something. But in a given context, I think it's important to pick one; otherwise you get editing chaos and a bad reading experience. Since the guy is a journalism professor, it's his job to teach students how to work in a professional journalistic context. Whether or not students personally think the comma should go inside or outside is irrelevant. They need to learn how to work within an organization's professional stylebook. Those things are filled with debatable points, because if everybody saw it the same way, there'd be no reason to write down a rule for it. In docking points here, he's doing the right thing. He's not just demanding conformance with his personal preference. He's demanding that they learn how to write like professionals.
- n0us 11y ago
  I intended the first meaning if my original comment wasn't clear. I agree that could be read either way and indeed, convention is useful in some situations. As far as driving on one side of the road or the other, if there were a compelling reason to switch sides of the road and it were practical to do so then it might make sense to switch. I don't believe that is the case, especially because road safety relies on a homogeneous rule set. Writing is not this way and using one style when it is appropriate does not affect the legibility of another independent body of text as long as the rule set is applied consistently in a particular body.
  - wpietri 11y ago
    I don't think the drive-on-the-right rule is only about safety. It's also about efficiency. We could also be safe without the rule, we'd just go a lot slower. I note that we have the same stay-on-the-right rule for walking, and it'd be hard to argue that it's mainly about safety there. As the author explains, for journalists the rule is widely consistent by country, which is a sign that, as with driving, there's something pushing us toward consistency. Given that there's a switching cost, and given that journalists change employers (and often write for multiple publications), and given that material gets reused between publications), I think there's good reason to have widespread agreement.
panglott 11y ago
Although I disagree with the professor on this, I do understand his point. A lot of what people learn in college is simply how to fit in among social elites and follow their norms. Lots of people place a high amount of importance on "proper" spelling and grammar. And rather than recognizing them as largely arbitrary social conventions, they'll deride those who do not use them as stupid or uneducated. There are simply millions of spelling/grammar nazis on Facebook. Copy editors are probably the most conservative to style change that there is. Because their mastery of arcane style rules is their "moat" or competitive advantage.

by n0us 11y ago

nkurz 11y ago

I tend to agree with you, but I'd like to understand better the mental process that leads him to penalize students for an approach that he concedes is logically preferable. My guess is that he thinks he's doing them a service by showing them how their writing will be judged "in the real world". Perhaps someone who agrees with the author's approach can offer better insight?

ldmoray 11y ago
The author teaches courses on Journalism. Agree with the logical style all you want, professional journalism is written according to style guides, and those style guides more often than not dictate American Style punctuation. In this case, "the real world" includes the newspapers his students wish to end up employed at. In the case of a professor taking marks off for punctuation issues when writing essays on history or economics or engineering, I agree that's wasteful.
- jdietrich 11y ago
  The "real world" of journalism is now highly globalized and casualized. Young journalists should expect to work for a large number of publications as interns, freelancers or short-term staffers. In this climate, adaptability is a core skill. It is perfectly appropriate for an instructor to specify a style for an assignment and grade accordingly. Dogmatically teaching only one style is outmoded and actively harmful.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
mturmon 11y ago
A pugnacious case for this position ("doing them a service by showing them how their writing will be judged") was made by DFW in his very long essay on English usage [http://harpers.org/wp-content/uploads/HarpersMagazine-2001-04-0070913.pdf http://harpers.org/wp-content/uploads/HarpersMagazine-2001-0...]. See the bottom of page 53, or see just the basic excerpt at: https://www.reddit.com/r/SRSDiscussion/comments/xp3i4/race_and_language_in_authority_and_american_usage/ https://www.reddit.com/r/SRSDiscussion/comments/xp3i4/race_a... . DFW, who of course did teach writing, got significant pushback in the letters the next month. There's no winning this particular debate.

ianbicking 11y ago

I would have loathed this teacher as a student. Fifteen years later I kind of get it – maybe it's right or wrong, but there is something to be said for writing to your audience and your medium. And papers written for this guy should use illogical punctuation. Probably writing code and doing code reviews has increased my sympathy: I frequently reject code that uses a style I might theoretically prefer, but which is not consistent. This can add some tedium to reviews for both parties. Of course since it's a one-way non-discussion point penalty that will possibly affect your permanent record, it's a little annoying, but that's just the shittiness of school.

n0us 11y ago
If I were in charge of reviewing code for a coworker I might object to their coding style as a matter of preference but if they were able to provide a reasoning for their position then I would "pass" them without requiring them to modify the code. This is the type of instruction the does not teach critical thinking that is crucial for success in higher education. Instead it teaches the student to memorize the book no matter how wrong it may seem. It also teaches them that the authority in any situation has the absolute ability to determine what is right and wrong, not that one style might be appropriate in some situations and inappropriate in others. If I were writing a novel, I might use the illogical American style because I don't anticipate quoting other individuals and having to convey their exact meaning. In philosophy courses I struggled with this because professors would request that I quote exactly, but also request that I put the period inside the quotes. As a result the style of the paper and the readability would both stuffer while I was stuck putting in more effort to disambiguate what I was trying to say when it could have been done in a simpler manner. The solution was often block-style quotes at the beginning of a section and references back to that section, or direct references to a page and line no. in the book.

rayiner 11y ago

I think camlCase is stupid. I prefer the traditional c_unix_form. But am I going to go into a camlCase codebase and start putting underscores everywhere because I think they're better?

Lawtonfogle 11y ago
If we were writing a group paper, this may apply. But you would choose to use c_unix_form on your own projects, no?
- rayiner 11y ago
  But in the real world, you're usually going to be writing in a context where your writing will be read alongside work written by others. E.g. a corporate report, a newspaper or magazine article, etc. If you're writing a novel, sure, do whatever you want.

wpietri 11y ago

I was with you until here: "'that's the way we do it' doesn't hold water in my mind." One way people can mean that is pure exercise of authority. "My way or the highway." I agree that's bunk. But there's another way to mean it. Take driving on two-way streets. It doesn't really matter which side we drive on; driving on the right works just as well as driving on the left. But it matters a lot that we pick one and stick with it. Why do Americans drive on the right? That's just the way we do it. As somebody who used to do page layout, I appreciate the convention of putting punctuation inside. As a programmer, I appreciate the convention of putting it outside. Neither is "wrong"; they're both fine ways of dealing with something. But in a given context, I think it's important to pick one; otherwise you get editing chaos and a bad reading experience. Since the guy is a journalism professor, it's his job to teach students how to work in a professional journalistic context. Whether or not students personally think the comma should go inside or outside is irrelevant. They need to learn how to work within an organization's professional stylebook. Those things are filled with debatable points, because if everybody saw it the same way, there'd be no reason to write down a rule for it. In docking points here, he's doing the right thing. He's not just demanding conformance with his personal preference. He's demanding that they learn how to write like professionals.

n0us 11y ago
I intended the first meaning if my original comment wasn't clear. I agree that could be read either way and indeed, convention is useful in some situations. As far as driving on one side of the road or the other, if there were a compelling reason to switch sides of the road and it were practical to do so then it might make sense to switch. I don't believe that is the case, especially because road safety relies on a homogeneous rule set. Writing is not this way and using one style when it is appropriate does not affect the legibility of another independent body of text as long as the rule set is applied consistently in a particular body.
- wpietri 11y ago
  I don't think the drive-on-the-right rule is only about safety. It's also about efficiency. We could also be safe without the rule, we'd just go a lot slower. I note that we have the same stay-on-the-right rule for walking, and it'd be hard to argue that it's mainly about safety there. As the author explains, for journalists the rule is widely consistent by country, which is a sign that, as with driving, there's something pushing us toward consistency. Given that there's a switching cost, and given that journalists change employers (and often write for multiple publications), and given that material gets reused between publications), I think there's good reason to have widespread agreement.

panglott 11y ago

Although I disagree with the professor on this, I do understand his point. A lot of what people learn in college is simply how to fit in among social elites and follow their norms. Lots of people place a high amount of importance on "proper" spelling and grammar. And rather than recognizing them as largely arbitrary social conventions, they'll deride those who do not use them as stupid or uneducated. There are simply millions of spelling/grammar nazis on Facebook. Copy editors are probably the most conservative to style change that there is. Because their mastery of arcane style rules is their "moat" or competitive advantage.