Guide to Electronic Presentation

Guide:

For our group presentation we focused on the electronic aspect of WOVEN.  Specifically on how electronic communication influences our society and our decisions.  We expanded on electronic communication by addressing the impact of Facebook, smart phones, music publicity, web comics, and finally YouTube.  These different categories of electronic communication can be easily related to one another.  It is easy to see how all of these relate to the electronic aspect of WOVEN as well as other forms such as oral and visual considering we are communicating over websites and such.  Also, it is obvious to see how the written aspect is incorporated considering our topics cover communication.

For our presentation, we used prezi to easily convey the purpose of our presentation.  We are addressing what I talked about above in various forms of multimedia such as YouTube videos, pictures, as well as the design and layout of our project.  Each one of us will elaborate on one of the five topics listed above and will provide time for questions concerning our individual papers or the presentation as a whole.

At the end of the presentation, we, as a group, hope you understand why we categorize these five topics under the central theme of electronic communication, and also how we relate them to the other forms of communication that WOVEN offers such as Oral and Visual.  We have included a list of resources in the comments that are incorporated in our presentation.  We hope you enjoyed!

http://prezi.com/okysbwo6bjlb/edit/?auth_key=gl7ol5m&follow=okeznyydyd5s#0_1779643

Writers and their Audience

In my experience of writing and reading papers, I have come to the conclusion that the audience you write to is very important in many different ways.  When it comes down to who you will be writing to, the author needs to think as to how he is going to write the paper because people have varying knowledge about different subjects and writers need to take that into consideration as a means of attracting the readers attention, furthering the readers knowledge, or helping the reader with research.  When writing about science and technology, there should be many publications but ones that address different knowledge levels about the subject.  I think writers should write about whatever they want to.  If they like to be more personal in their writing and like the reader to understand the subject more for a first time then they should do that.  Scientists should record their findings even though they are not the best in conveying the findings so personally.  Their findings regardless of the degree of comprehensiveness are important because it furthers science and the future.  


When someone writes about science and technology, that writer needs to be aware of his material and to whom he is addressing.  The material may be very general or specific which makes comprehension of the material a key point when writing to an audience.  In my opinion, every writer should have his/her own target crowd to write to so they know how informative their piece can be.  For example, scientists usually write about theses, and in those writings, there are usually many difficult concepts and words that regular people are not familiar with.  Therefore it is logical for scientists to direct their writings to other scientists, who can expand on their theses, or to researches who are writing important documents that are for educational purposes.  But where does that leave the regular people who do not have much knowledge in the field?  In my opinion, when it comes to this matter of writing to people with little to no background knowledge then writers with good personal skills that write about the basics of that topic should be used.  Because they attract the reader into the subject and not confuse them.  If readers like the topic then they can progress to the rigors or reading scientists research and findings.  This just provides a good segway to the harder material.  These are my opinions on audience and writings.

Writing about Science and Technology

            There are many questions surrounding writings of science and technology. Many people have many different views on this issue. These views stem from different aspects, such as the audience of the writing. The writings can be geared toward a certain group, which would lead to diversity in opinion about them. The audience is a big determining factor in writing because writers have many different reasons for their writing. They can write to inform a certain group of people about something they are not experts in, or they could write to inform experts in a field about new developments or improvements. The problem comes in someone who is not of the target or intended audience reads one of these writings and is not able to comprehend. A paper by a scientist can be geared toward other scientists. In this kind of situation, the writer would assume some sort of knowledge in the field. Another situation is where a write writes to inform people who do not have any significant knowledge in something. In this situation an expert in the field would not find the writing interesting and would choose not to read it.

 In my opinion, experts in a certain field should be the ones to write about their field. The examples of target audiences show how there can be a disparity in the reception of the writing. To avoid this, these writings can be modified in several different ways. Scientists and journalists can make sure to explicitly state the target audience of the writing in order to avoid the problem that comes up when people who are not in the target audience read them. Another way to fix this problem would be for these scientific and technology experts to standardize their writing so that they are able to reach a broad audience without discriminating. In order to reach this broader spectrum, technology and science writings should be modified so that everyone will gain the enjoyment or satisfaction they want from reading the writing.

Target audiences and the structure of papers

When people write informative papers about science and technology, a major factor that influences how they lay out their information and how it is worded is audience. A target audience must be chosen and the writing must be focused around the chosen group (or groups) of people. For example, a scientist writing a paper exposing his or her findings will be directed at other scientists, and will be written accordingly. A scientist will assume his or her audience knows the concepts behind the paper, and therefore will be able to follow the complex material that is covered in the paper. A scientist will not waste time explaining the basic concepts behind his work, when he/she knows that the targeted audience already has all the knowledge required to understand the published work. Someone from a different audience, without a scientific background, would most likely not understand what is being covered in the paper, and, as such, would not read it.

Someone else, such as a historian writing a paper intended to be published for profit, his target audience will be more of the general population. His paper will cover more of the basic concepts behind his work, and perhaps not go as in-depth into the findings as a scientific paper would. Because of this, someone specialized in the field of study the published work covers will not be as interested, as it contains a lot of information that he already knows. Of course, these publications have different end goals. A scientist publishing a scientific paper probably wants to get it reviewed by peers in order to advance knowledge in his particular field, while the historian writing something to be published for profit wants to spread some general knowledge (usually) to the public. Therefore, when writing something to be published, it is important to take into account the targeted audience, as it will determine the content and writing style of the paper.

Who Should Write What?: Analyzing the Roles of Authors and Audiences in Scientific and Technology Writings

When perusing scientific literature, there are three kinds of authors. There are the journalists, the scientific historians, and the scientists themselves. Each is usually designated towards a specific audience: with the journalists tending to focus on the general public, the historians focusing on people more learned about the field, and scientists focusing on reaching out to other scientists. When people have little to know idea about the subject they are looking at to learn, a good starting point is to read the works of journalists and novelists. These authors may not be definitive experts in that field, but they they do have a good handle on what that topic is, and are able to explain it in a way that the novice is able to understand. This is very useful, due to the fact that the scientists know so much about their field, and have no idea what the reader doesn't knkow about the field, that it is really difficult for them to teach at a very basicc level. The journalists, however, have a fresh perspective on the topic, which is very helpful to the readers. The journalists remember what it was like not understanding the concepts that they are now somewhat familiar with, and are able to translate their learning experience into a distilled source for the reader to learn from. The historians have a firmer grasp on the topic than the journalists and are more suited towards intermediate readers. The historians not only have to know the subject itself, but have to know the history of the subject, and the history of the pioneers and researcers in that field as well. Since the history of human understanding conveniently goes from a basic to progressively more advanced as time goes by, historians in a particular field are well suited for being able to accomadate various levels of experitise even if their audience may not be as wide as the targeted readership aimed for by journalists. If I were to have an interest in chemistry and was curious on why these various equations are used, the historian can give me information on the person who discovered the principles, how they discovered it, and what uses it could be used for. This allows me to gain a much more expansive comprehension of the chemical principle, and be able to apply that understanding more on my journey for knowledge. The scientists write for other scientists, the writings that they work on are on the bleeding-edge of that field, and could be disproven or groundbreaking one day or the next. These writings would scare off most readers, and as such, are rarely ever found at the top of best-seller lists.

The main question with these writers is, "Should they write in these ways?" The answer is mostly yes, but perhaps there should be a little more “mixing” on the scientists' part. Scientists tend to detach themselves from general readership, and usually are used to thinking of their topics in specific ways. However, sometimes trying to explain a difficult topic in a basic manner can give new insight to the scientist doing the explaining. Take Einstein for example. When exploring motion and time, the general population would use traveling in a train as an example of having various points of perception and how time is experienced. Einstein wanted to prove that motion is relative to the observer but the train model did not always work. So, he came up with the analogy of a man in an infinitely tall elevator accelerating upward at a constant rate. The man inside would experience the accelaration as a “gravitational pull” and the man could potentially feel as if on Earth. Then Einstein realized that if a light was shone into the elevator, it would bend down slightly. He then thought of how if gravity was analogous to acceleration in that aspect, it should be able to been able to bend light. This then showed how gravity and acceleration can both affect frames of reference, and through continued thought processes, he was able to build even further on what we now know as general relativity. This proves that, while scientists should focus mostly on their research, being able to convey their ideas to an average person could become beneficial and help the scientists themselves in looking at their work in new light. If anyone should try and experiment with writing outside of the audience that they should be writing for, it should be the scientists, because as Albert Einstein once said, "You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother."

Writings of Science and Technology

There isn’t one single purpose for writing about science and technology or one specific audience that is trying to be reached. Two types of people tend to write about science and technology, and they can be categorized as either scientists or historians. Scientists tend to write for other scientists or professionals in their field. As a result, they make several assumptions, including numerous about the reader’s prior knowledge of the topic. This is because professionals do not need specific terms or concepts explained in detail, and they are held to a higher standard than the general public. In addition, the purpose for a scientist’s writing is usually to prove a concept or defend one side of an argument. By publishing their findings, they are looking for scientific breakthroughs or the opportunity to confirm their hypothesis. They rarely write simply to inform others on what they found without drawing any further conclusions. Furthermore, scientists tend to focus solely on the facts. Scientific journals are not concerned with prose and word choice or extracting specific emotional responses from their audience. Someone who is not very familiar with the scientific world would not only say that the written work of a scientist can be difficult to comprehend, but it is also rather boring. I feel that the writing of a scientist is more useful and credible than that of a historian as well. Since scientists are reporting and analyzing their findings, their work is more productive and beneficial to the world of science. Moreover, since they are experts in their respective fields, their work can be read with less skepticism and questionable information compared to the work of historians.

Both the audience and purpose that historians focus on when writing about science and technology greatly differ from those of scientists. Primarily, historians broaden their audience to include people who may know very little about the topic. This not only breaks down technological and scientific innovation for those who have not studied these topics much, but it sparks the interest of a greater audience. The writing of a scientist is too advanced to benefit anyone who is not already an aficionado for science, and these people may lose their interest in science if it wasn’t for historians. Furthermore, historians tend to write more of a narrative when writing about science and technology. They are able to turn facts and famous events in the world of science and technology into stories driven by plot and even some suspense. For example, Miller mentions that scientists are portrayed as heroes once they make a discovery, and their breakthroughs can be described as mythical or extraordinary based on how the historian portrays them. Even though historians lack the credibility of professionals when writing about science, their contributions are still crucial to expand scientific and technological works to a broader audience. Just as scientists write to contribute to the world of science, historians make their contributions with the general public and in facets of society outside the scientific world. Likewise, the fact that their purpose is to inform the reader through narrative, which can be viewed as entertainment, proves that they are essential in maintaining a wider spectrum of interest toward science and technology.