Response to Jonathan Malesic’s “How Dumb Do They Think We Are?” and Susan Blum’s “Academic Integrity and Student Plagiarism: a Question of Education, not Ethics.”

       After reading, Jonathan Malesic’s “How Dumb Do They Think We Are?” and Susan Blum’s “Academic Integrity and Student Plagiarism: a Question of Education, not Ethics" I have some new formed opinions about plagiarism. Blum writes,"There are big differences among imperfectly mastering citation norms, incorporating a sentence, omitting quotation marks, and turning in someone else's paper"(Blum). I found this statement to be very accurate. If a student doesn't properly cite and puts quotes in the wrong place, why should he or she get penalized so severely. The problem I have with plagiarism policies is that there is not one strict guideline. Every teacher explains rules differently and expects different things, so in my opinion students are pulled back and forth with these different styles. This results almost always in a paper being flawed in some way. However, Blum notes the difference between an improper citation and turning in someone else's paper. I think that if a student just blatantly cheats and copies a paper, then a penalty is suitable. I believe this is ultimately a better method, "That means teaching students what academic integrity involves, why professors value it, and how exactly to carry it out" (Blum).
   On the other hand, I found Malesic to be a little too hard on students in general. I understand his frustration, but does he really expect all students to be perfect for him? He states, "There shouldn't be room in my classroom for that kind of student. Indeed, that person is not really a student at all" (Malefic). I found this statement to be insensitive and a little extreme. Malesic then goes on to offer,"But maybe we can agree at least that we can try to broaden students' perspectives and raise their standards, so that they can be better critics -- and better self-critics" (Malesic). This approach could likely help a little more, but until there are more universal rules, this argument is questionable.

Response to William Zinsser's "Writing About People: The Interview

      After reading,  I found this chapter to be very useful in helping a writer go about the process of an interview. I think that the approach he advises is very helpful and the precautions he gives are insightful. My favorite piece of advice was, "Take heart. You'll find the solution if you look for the human element" (101). I found this to ring very true especially for my first interview. I think the fact that some of my questions got a more detailed about literacy made the professor I interviewed more personally with specific details in his life. I also found this tip to be important in the process, "Choose as your subject someone whose job is so important, or so interesting, or so unusual that the average reader would want to read about that person" (104). As Zinsser then goes on to say, it doesn't need to be the CEO of some fancy company but someone that people can find interesting or relate to in some way. People also especially enjoy hearing the specifics of peoples' lives. The only thing I found to be a little boring was when he went into detail about quotes and how to to them the right way. Lastly, I agreed with his opinion, "What's wrong, I believe,  is to fabricate quotes or to surmise what someone might have said. Writing is a public trust" (115). I don't think the writer should completely change what someone says in an interview. Maybe a few small spelling mistakes can be corrected but language is most interesting, I find, when it's raw and how someone truly speaks.

William Zinsser's "Writing Family History and Memoir," from book, On Writing Well.

After reading William Zinsser's "Writing Family History and Memoir," a chapter from his book, On Writing Well, I enjoyed his personal advice on how to write a proper memoir. He wrote and told various stories in a humbling manner which I thought to be effective. He gives advice in stating, "Writing is a powerful search mechanism, and one if its satisfactions is to come to terms with your life narrative." (283). I find this to be true in writing, a concept that writers need to understand so there writing is strong. He then writes, "Another is to work through some of life's hardest knocks-loss, grief, illness, addiction, disappointment, failure- and to find understanding and solace. (283)." I think this to be true because some of the best memoir writing possesses all of these emotions and different states of mind, essential in telling a good and true story. I enjoyed when he wrote about the woman who went back to the Polish village that her father escaped from during the Holocaust. He pointed out that the story did not need to revolve around her father because it is her story. He writes how this type of experience can be beneficial to one's writing, "It can also be an act of healing for you. If you make an honest transactions with your own humanity and with the humanity of people who crossed your life, no matter how much pain they caused you or you caused them, readers will connect on your journey (286). Ultimately, this chapter proved to be interesting in its efforts to explain how one writes a memoir, and to not worry so much about every little detail that a family member has to say, but your own true memory.

Blog #9 Anne Lamott's Bird By Bird

"Perfectionism"
After reading two chapters from Anne Lamott's Bird By Bird, I think it is safe to say that she is onto something in her lesson on informing readers how to write. I especially enjoyed her emphasis in saying that striving to be perfect isn't going to get you too far. She even claims that in one's efforts to be perfect it can actually hurt their writing. She notes, "Perfectionism is one way our muscles cramp. In some cases we don't even know that the wounds and the cramping are there, but both limit us" (30). I find this statement to be very true. Writers and students in general are held to such high standards that sometimes we forget that a mistake is acceptable. Not only a mistake, but also sometimes guidelines are so strict that it leaves little room for creativity. I enjoy how she acknowledged, "What people somehow (inadvertently, I'm sure) forgot to mention when we were children was that we need to make messes in order to find out who we are and why we are here-and, by extension, what we're supposed to be writing" (32). I particularly enjoyed this chapter.

"Looking Around"
This chapter served as a lesson to be more aware of your surroundings to enhance writing. I like how she acknowledged that in order to be a stronger writer, one must sort of separate themselves from their own bias. She also points out how we are all sort of in our own world, writing, "The conscious mind seems to block that feeling of oneness so we can function efficiently, maneuver in the world a little bit better, get our taxes done on time" (99). If we could all just try a little harder to understand and except each other, it seems the world would be better.