Bombastic Dissemination of Momentous Instruction
In college I was lucky enough to have a professor for my advanced writing class who had spent much of her life working in the real world. She emphasized that the point of writing is to clearly communicate with someone else. (As opposed to showing everyone how "smart" you are.) That meant that our papers were graded harshly for pompous, unclear phrasing or using big, unwieldy words when simpler ones would do.
A lot of editing in that class was crossing out unnecessary fluff.
It was good practice for me. When I started my first real job post-mission, there was a class in my new employee orientation about writing clearly also. It makes an impression when your boss tells you to never use the word "utilize." ("It can ALWAYS be replaced by the word 'use!'") The trouble was that I quickly learned that a lot of the other consultants preferred to make their reports big and wordy. They thought it sounded more sophisticated. In vain I would edit mine to make them clear and direct, only to get told by the head consultant to change it back so I "sounded like I knew what I was talking about." Never mind that the boss demanding more direct writing was her boss too.
It wasn't tactful to point out that even she couldn't explain her own ridiculous sentences so I didn't. (I do have some sense of self-preservation.)
Recently I got a newsletter from my kids' school that brought this all back to me again. The common core standards that the school has to use next year are going to be tougher than what they've been using in the past. So they are having a meeting this month to explain the changes to the parents. The note about it in the school newsletter contains this gem:
"We are fortifying instructional strategies and materials that will enable us to positively impact the rigor contained in the new standards."
I nearly spit out my drink when I read that line. At least I didn't snort it up my nose. I hope whoever is in charge of putting together the newsletter is not going to be teaching the writing standards!!
What exactly does this communicate? If you know the definitions of the words they are using, it doesn't make any sense. "Positively impact the rigor"-- what does that mean? They want make the tough part of the standards easier? (That would be positive, from one point of view.) Or are the standards not rigorous enough and they want to make them tougher? Either way, they have no control over the standards so they can't impact them at all. "Fortifying instructional strategies"-- can you sound any more pretentious?
The trouble with trying to make yourself sound smart and professional is that you may have the opposite effect. Worse, you are not communicating clearly with the parents. This is not part of an abstract for an academic journal! You are just trying to tell the parents that you are having a meeting to explain how you have come up with new ways to teach so you can meet the tougher standards that start next year.
Who knows, maybe some poor teacher actually wrote it out like that and her boss made her correct it. "You need to sound like you know what you're talking about! This is too easy to understand!"
A lot of editing in that class was crossing out unnecessary fluff.
It was good practice for me. When I started my first real job post-mission, there was a class in my new employee orientation about writing clearly also. It makes an impression when your boss tells you to never use the word "utilize." ("It can ALWAYS be replaced by the word 'use!'") The trouble was that I quickly learned that a lot of the other consultants preferred to make their reports big and wordy. They thought it sounded more sophisticated. In vain I would edit mine to make them clear and direct, only to get told by the head consultant to change it back so I "sounded like I knew what I was talking about." Never mind that the boss demanding more direct writing was her boss too.
It wasn't tactful to point out that even she couldn't explain her own ridiculous sentences so I didn't. (I do have some sense of self-preservation.)
Recently I got a newsletter from my kids' school that brought this all back to me again. The common core standards that the school has to use next year are going to be tougher than what they've been using in the past. So they are having a meeting this month to explain the changes to the parents. The note about it in the school newsletter contains this gem:
"We are fortifying instructional strategies and materials that will enable us to positively impact the rigor contained in the new standards."
I nearly spit out my drink when I read that line. At least I didn't snort it up my nose. I hope whoever is in charge of putting together the newsletter is not going to be teaching the writing standards!!
What exactly does this communicate? If you know the definitions of the words they are using, it doesn't make any sense. "Positively impact the rigor"-- what does that mean? They want make the tough part of the standards easier? (That would be positive, from one point of view.) Or are the standards not rigorous enough and they want to make them tougher? Either way, they have no control over the standards so they can't impact them at all. "Fortifying instructional strategies"-- can you sound any more pretentious?
The trouble with trying to make yourself sound smart and professional is that you may have the opposite effect. Worse, you are not communicating clearly with the parents. This is not part of an abstract for an academic journal! You are just trying to tell the parents that you are having a meeting to explain how you have come up with new ways to teach so you can meet the tougher standards that start next year.
Who knows, maybe some poor teacher actually wrote it out like that and her boss made her correct it. "You need to sound like you know what you're talking about! This is too easy to understand!"
Comments