Career Workshops: Writing Workshop led by Kathryn Tosney

Lecture and workshop on writing: "Writing for your life: clarity, argument, and reader-oriented prose" was given by Kathryn Tosney, Director of SEEDS. The lecture was open to all. After the talk, a two-hour SEEDS “Writing workshop: applying writing strategies” was available to the first six students/postdocs who registered and sent in the required written sample. Additional audience participants were also invited to attend.

Below, read participant comments on the lecture and the workshop

Was the lecture what you expected?

• Absolutely, enjoyed the hands on interactive style of the lecture.
• Very engaging and comfortable tone
• Yes. Yes I liked the specific examples
• Yes, provided good detail on common writing mistakes and presented solutions Yes, 1 hour long seminar on writing clear prose
• Yes, this was a good primer to how to write effectively Yes, but there was not much we could cover in a one hour time frame
• Yes, Tosney presented practical writing lessons.
• Nothing was too in –depth, but the tips were very helpful. I am sure the workshop provided more depth, but I didn’t participate in it.
• Yes, I expected and received concrete advice on how to structure my writing for maximum clarity and emphasis conveyed to the reader.
• It was.
• It was a good mix of talking to us and working/looking at examples It was helpful to improve my writing skills.

 

Did this lecture provide solid strategies useful for your grant and/or paper writing? Please elaborate

• The exercises helped solidify the techniques of word order, linkage, and emphasis points
• Hints to write better
• The examples of good and bad paragraphs were helpful Utilize topic sentences; write arguments, word order counts, etc...
• All useful strategies for effective writing.
• Yes, reader-oriented prose and argument based
• Very good examples
• It was a good refresher on paragraph structure and crafting of logical arguments
• Yes, the tips provided were useful to keep in mind when writing.
• A lot of these lessons were things we’ve heard before, but I found it very helpful to have Tosney’s perspective as well as to have those lessons repeated again.
• The more we hear this kind of advice the better our writing will be.
• The techniques described can be easily implemented for any writing project
• Yes, very specific Yes, methods and reasons to use those methods

 

Of all the issues covered, what did you consider to be the most significant?

• The importance of giving your readers all the help possible to follow your intentions/message
• Structure, identify the big topic I would like to hear more about the importance of verb choice Topic points are often most useful at the beginning
• How to meet the readers expectations How to structure a sentence properly
• Well there seemed to be only that issue- paragraph structure and clear presentation and support of the topic argue for a paragraph
• The emphasis on structuring sentences into specific arguments was powerful because this format makes our writing more purposeful and forceful .
• Before the lecture, I hadn’t thought to devote so much attention to each sentence’s structure.
• That the writer is solely responsible for conveying meaning clearly and quickly.
• Grant reviewer or peer scientist readers are not going to dig through your writing to pull out the main points, and thus it is your responsibility as a writer to ensure that the story you are telling is easily discernible.
• Very clear speaking about strategies to improve, framed all science as a process of argumentative writing
• The one to one coaching

 

How might this event be improved in the future?

• I don’t have any constructive criticism beyond offering it more frequently (my 1st exposure yet my 3rd year as a graduate student)
• More practice examples with time to discuss various outcomes/answers
• Include a catered lunch Longer with more examples I liked the format, but the pace could have been faster.
• There was really not much covered in the initial hour lecture. I did not stay for the following workshop.
• The handout is a good reference. Perhaps include in the hand out or online more references and examples.
• I did not attend the workshop, in which this may have been done, but I would have liked to be given a “badly written” passage and then try myself to rewrite it for greater clarity and emphasis, and then go over it with the instructor to see how well I did or what she would have done.
• Add time for rewriting the 1-page proposal cover

Was the workshop what you expected?

• No, I expected more fine tuned editing. I was pleasantly surprised to realize this was not the case and to focus on proper argument formation.
• Yes, it was great to go through each paper one by one
• Yes, I got critical, helpful feedback for my writing
• Yes, very much helped to rework my proposal and other’s to convince readers
• No, it was incredibly BETTER. I was shocked to how the same advice could be applied to so many different fields and substantially improve everyone’s writing!
• Yes Yes, gave great examples of writing, reviewing and editing proposals

 

Did this workshop provide strategies useful for your grant and/or paper writing? Please elaborate

• Much more clear for grant writing than manuscript
• Topic sentence work was great
• Importance of topic sentence and how grant givers read proposals
• Yes especially as it pertains to the major topic of the grant
• It provided very concrete & specific advice that I can implement tomorrow.
• Yes

 

The workshop was interactive, with all participants asked to comment on other’s proposals and to apply strategies learned from the preceding lecture. Were these interactions useful to you as a recipient of comments (Yes/No) and a conveyer of comments (Yes/No). Please elaborate.

• Yes useful both as a recipient and a conveyer
• Yes useful as a recipient, it was great to hear what other people thought the major points were.
• Yes useful both as a recipient and a conveyer.
• Important to hear how various readers are reading my writing
• Yes useful both as a recipient and a conveyer.
• I learned how to better my grant and how to critique others
• Yes useful both as a recipient and a conveyer.
• I would only caution that in a short workshop we would really benefit most from hearing the instructors comment more than each others comments.
• Overall, it really helped us practice and apply these new skills to others people ‘s work and our own work.
• It was neither, but was really useful.
• I learned how to deal with problems I didn’t suspect they exist and with the ones already known.
• I only sat in, but was able to listen to discussion and compare my ideas with participants

 

How might this workshop be improved in the future?

• More frequent More on how (or how not) these techniques differ for manuscript preparations.
• Maybe some work on re-writing, have everyone give a shot at an intro sentence for each paper.
• ½ day full day writing workshop
• Different departments and subjects to talk about
• Each participant at the end of our review of a proposal should try to write a topic sentence and pass it to the person who wrote the proposal.
• Have it more often