After 30 years government service at State and DOD, I endorse this advice on points of style. Do be alert, however, for arguments about style that are camouflage for issues about content. This is a rare problem but it can happen. I once replaced my initials as drafter on a policy memo with those of the senior officer for whom I was writing a policy paper because I strongly disagreed with his requirements for the paper’s policy content. I disagreed strongly enough not to want to be identified with the paper.
An interesting thought. I faced the same dilemma at the SMC a few years back. We went through five semesters with different instructors at each phase. Not surprisingly, each instructor had their own way of grading the papers we wrote. Some walked tall and boasted of their ability to write and read, while others openly placed much less emphasis. The latter preferred that we could articulate what we wrote about, but didn't stress conventions of writing. The "wishy-washy" approaches from different classes caused a few issues because people didn't know what the Wookie wanted. The fallback answer was always, "APA 7 is the standard Sergeant Major, do your best." Definitely not what some of us wanted to hear.
Whether it is the reader, supervisor, instructor, or whomever we decide the Wookie is for what we write, if the Wookie doesn’t read it (can't make it past a few sentences) or gives it a poor grade, then we need to give them what they want.
I hear the same thing from CGSC students. They want to write against a standardized checklist. But in real life, they'll write for diverse readers using a variety of standards. Learning to understand and write for the reader is a critical skill.
I am just a civilian, but I agree, Dr. Lythgoe, it is always difficult to please everyone; human nature in action to judge and find flaws to feel better with oneself.
We must know our audience first; we all have our specific political, cultural, religious, academic and cognitive biases. Additionally, the age or generation of the readers, including their experience in the field also has an impact on their level of approval.
It's not the same to write for teens and young adults (15-35) versus writing for experienced professionals (36+ y.o.) who have a different perspective and depth of a topic which may be the result of their expertise, academic background and life experiences.
Great article and loved what you did there with the Star Wars analogy, you targeted a different type of audience than the military.
Even if some readers hesitated to invest time on a reading, you caught our attention with the Wookiee reference; it worked for me, as it created loyalty to a professional writer who is a human being providing his expertise.
After 30 years government service at State and DOD, I endorse this advice on points of style. Do be alert, however, for arguments about style that are camouflage for issues about content. This is a rare problem but it can happen. I once replaced my initials as drafter on a policy memo with those of the senior officer for whom I was writing a policy paper because I strongly disagreed with his requirements for the paper’s policy content. I disagreed strongly enough not to want to be identified with the paper.
Spot on! Let the Wookie Win! This is too awesome.
An interesting thought. I faced the same dilemma at the SMC a few years back. We went through five semesters with different instructors at each phase. Not surprisingly, each instructor had their own way of grading the papers we wrote. Some walked tall and boasted of their ability to write and read, while others openly placed much less emphasis. The latter preferred that we could articulate what we wrote about, but didn't stress conventions of writing. The "wishy-washy" approaches from different classes caused a few issues because people didn't know what the Wookie wanted. The fallback answer was always, "APA 7 is the standard Sergeant Major, do your best." Definitely not what some of us wanted to hear.
Whether it is the reader, supervisor, instructor, or whomever we decide the Wookie is for what we write, if the Wookie doesn’t read it (can't make it past a few sentences) or gives it a poor grade, then we need to give them what they want.
Thanks for the analogy, great piece!
I hear the same thing from CGSC students. They want to write against a standardized checklist. But in real life, they'll write for diverse readers using a variety of standards. Learning to understand and write for the reader is a critical skill.
I am just a civilian, but I agree, Dr. Lythgoe, it is always difficult to please everyone; human nature in action to judge and find flaws to feel better with oneself.
We must know our audience first; we all have our specific political, cultural, religious, academic and cognitive biases. Additionally, the age or generation of the readers, including their experience in the field also has an impact on their level of approval.
It's not the same to write for teens and young adults (15-35) versus writing for experienced professionals (36+ y.o.) who have a different perspective and depth of a topic which may be the result of their expertise, academic background and life experiences.
Great article and loved what you did there with the Star Wars analogy, you targeted a different type of audience than the military.
Even if some readers hesitated to invest time on a reading, you caught our attention with the Wookiee reference; it worked for me, as it created loyalty to a professional writer who is a human being providing his expertise.