Sherman Alexie is visiting my university on November 5th. I’m totally there.

I got to see and speak with Kate DiCamillo a little over a week ago at the downtown Borders in Ann Arbor. I should be online at Borders Live at 01. We’ll see if my question merits airtime.

Sometimes, it’s rockin’ awesome to live in such a literary area. *sigh of happiness*

Today, I have sent something to:

Germany
Sweden x2
UK
Italy
France x2
Japan
India
Switzerland
Israel
Canada

So cool. Love my job.

Article Summary #2

Corbin, Michelle, Pat Moell, and Mike Boyd. ”Technical editing as quality assurance: adding value to content. (Applied Theory).” Technical Communication 49.3 (August 2002): 286(15). Academic OneFile. Gale. Eastern Michigan University. 5 Oct. 2007 
<http://find.galegroup.com.ezproxy.emich.edu/itx/start.do?prodId=AONE>.

Summary

This is a very long article, so I will attempt to hit all the major points without going into too much detail; otherwise this summary will be five-pages long, and that is just too darn much for anyone to handle right now.

Basically, these researchers (Michelle Corbin, Pat Moell, and Mike Boyd) are comparing software testing and technical editing in order to show how the levels-of-edit systems can help to add “value to content” well before the product is released. The “quality assurance” comes through content editing, and this shows that “technical editors add value to the information development process and help to give users the quality content that they deserve” (287). 

After the initial introductory pages that outline what they are going to study and why, the researchers begin to explain software testing, and then they compare it to technical editing. It is fascinating how similar they are, and I began to draw comparisons with children’s nonfiction editing, which I discuss further in the Pertaining to Project section of this paper.

It is difficult to explain all of their comparisons in full detail, but I would like to point out some of quotes I found most interesting. They are normally discussing editing at the comprehensive level, though they do point out that the “lower” levels are just as important, as well.

–“[E]ditors can catch structural flaws early in the development cycle, thus improving quality and reducing costs, because additions and changes are not perpetuated within an already flawed structure” (290). This quote is meaningful because it puts into perspective how important a technical editor can be, and it also shows how important it is to get a detail-oriented, well-qualified editor to evaluate work.

–“Technical editors must know how each information deliverable fits with the others, and they must know the users and how those users work with the software” (291). What the researchers are describing here is user-centered editing, and this directly pertains to my project. I also like how they mention multiple users, though I don’t think they were meaning that there is more than one type of user; there is just more than one user. Though this means it doesn’t fit perfectly with my project, it still lends proof that editors, technical or otherwise, act in place of the user and keep the user(s) in mind at all times in the editing process.

–“Technical editors cannot replace the usefulness of actual usability testing; however, they can stand in for the users by becoming the ‘first users’ of the information” (293). This quote backs up the previous quote: Editors continually have the users in mind, even going so far as to stand in their place when using the table of contents and index. Children’s nonfiction editors do this, as well, though they step into the shoes of a third grader versus technical editors, who may be looking at the product through the eyes of an adult professional. Nonetheless, user-centered editing and design are an imperative part of the levels of edit.

This all ties back to quality assurance because the editors are continually making decisions that will affect the outcomes of the product. When they engage in comprehensive editing, they are providing a service not written into their job description—they are acting as user, editor, designer, and writer, all the while making sure the product published is of the highest quality. When they begin their part of the process with comprehensive editing, they are ensuring that no mistakes are left unchanged. They are saving their company time and money. What CEO wouldn’t love that?

In the end, this article is part handbook for technical editors and part advocate for the technical editor as a crucial part of the publishing process. It has a lot of viable information for the technical editor, technical writer, and company in need of this quality assurance. 

Pertaining to Project

I chose to look at two articles on opposite ends of the spectrum for a reason—I wanted to start making connections between children’s nonfiction and publishing and between children’s nonfiction editing and technical editing, which user-centered design theories have already been applied to. I will make the connection between them all soon enough.

This article is pertinent to my project because it is helping me to make those connections between kid lit editing and tech editing. I have to admit that they are very similar. This will make the connections between the user-centered design theories and kid lit editing a lot easier. I am already seeing how I can apply user-centered design theories to editing. 

Technical editing and kid nonfiction editing have many similarities. The technical editor is the designer of the document, and kid editing is the same. “‘The technical editor is an advocate for the language, the company, the writers, and, most importantly, for the users’” (288). This is also true for children’s nonfiction editors, and, again, being an advocate for the users is the most important aspect of their overall advocacy. Kid nonfiction editors act as user during the editing process, and that can mean stepping into the shoes of the teacher, librarian, or student.

Though this article doesn’t directly say, “We’re applying user-centered design theories to technical editing,” that is what they are basically doing, through the levels of edit. I had never thought to use the levels of edit, which I am now well-versed in thanks to my Technical Editing class, which I took last winter. Though simple and made for the sciences, the levels of edit can be modified for different situations, and they be useful in my study. I will keep this in mind as I progress through the planning parts of the project.

Article Summary #1

Palmer, Rosemary G., and Roger A. Stewart. “Nonfiction trade book use in primary grades.” The Reading Teacher 57.1 (Sept 2003): 38(11). Academic OneFile. Gale. Eastern Michigan University. 7 Oct. 2007
<http://find.galegroup.com.ezproxy.emich.edu/itx/start.do?prodId=AONE>.

Summary

The researchers, Palmer and Stewart, had completed a study of middle-grade classes (I’m assuming grades 5–8) and their use of nonfiction in the classroom in 1998. They wanted to look further at this topic, so they studied primary-grade classes and their use of nonfiction in the classroom in an elementary school in the Pacific Northwest of the United States, though they do quote from a study set in the United Kingdom a few years previous.

Their goals were to look at if nonfiction was being used, if it was being used effectively, and how students respond to nonfiction—do they like it; do they seek it out during their weekly 30-minute library time and during the daily Drop Everything And Read (DEAR) time, which lasted 20 minutes; and how do they use the nonfiction?

Palmer and Stewart first explained how they studied nonfiction use at this elementary school (Walnut Elementary), and by outlining their methodology, I began to see how careful and thorough they were in their study. This is important when they begin to make declarations in their conclusion. They observed the students’ library time, their DEAR time, interviewed the teachers and school librarian, interviewed a set of students and used these students in a brief focus group, and analyzed library checkout patterns.

Their conclusions include the following:

–The nonfiction materials that were provided for the students were normally at inappropriate reading levels. Many students looked at the pictures and didn’t read the text because the terms were too large and/or complicated. Many teachers were unaware of the abundance of age-appropriate, quality nonfiction available to them. Also, many of the teachers did not have enough funding to purchase new books for their classrooms.

–The use of the nonfiction was teacher centered, as the teacher was the “information broker” (42). Because the materials were at inappropriate reading levels, the students could not read them on their own, so the teacher had to read the books aloud and then interpret the readings. They helped students who tried to read the texts on their own, and they continually acted as interpreters. The students did very little independent learning.

–Not only were the provided nonfiction materials written for higher reading levels, heavy concept loads were dumped on the students by either the curricula standards or the teachers, as well. Third-grade students were covering the solar system when the U.S. National Science Standards state this topic is appropriate for grades 5–8. Again, because of these complexities, the learning practices became teacher centered.

Their final conclusions and reflections contain a vision of classrooms filled with books that are reading appropriate and students reading and comprehending on their own. They also see families reading nonfiction together and not just enjoying fiction.

They also state that “[d]uring DEAR time, teachers wanted children to read and not just look at pictures, so they encouraged fiction reading” (45). Basically, teachers and librarians are put between a rock and a hard place, and “they did the best they could with their limited resources and knowledge of what was available” (45).

The researchers also outline three factors that need to be taken into consideration by teachers and administrators when making nonfiction available to students and as requirements in the classroom:

1. “[A]vailability and accessibility are key variables”(46) when choosing nonfiction to provide in the classroom. Make it reading-appropriate and provide more topics that students of that age might be interested in.

2. “[T]eachers need knowledge about informational books, including how to find and use them effectively” (46) The researchers had discovered that the only teachers they interviewed that knew about the nonfiction books available to their students and how to effectively use them in the classroom were teachers who had attended a nonfiction workshop put on by a publisher and those who had graduated within the last 5 years or continue their education.

3. “[T]eacher training is an important factor” (46) because the teachers they observed didn’t attempt to seek out more reading-appropriate nonfiction. They would just read it aloud to the student or help them. Or, worse, they would just let the students look at the pictures without reading any of the text.

Finally, Palmer and Stewart outline several research topics that should be pursued to flesh out this and other studies that have been completed along this line. They include looking at Accelerated Reader programs, why primary-grade teachers love or hate nonfiction, and “the effect of nonfiction on young children’s literacy development” (47).

Pertaining to Project

This article (which I just happened upon while researching for information on children’s nonfiction publishing) is a veritable goldmine of information about nonfiction in the classroom, which is especially important to my project because I will be looking at how to create a “quality” series. This article basically outlined what a good series is: effective, clear, and reader-friendly. Its language also needs to be reading-appropriate while containing more in-depth information. It also seems important to teachers to have accompanying worksheets and supplemental information, which I know many publishers provide.

I highlighted a great deal in this article, and I am excited to start looking more at how teachers use (or, more appropriately, don’t use) nonfiction in the classroom. I think these points are valid in my attempt to seek out a definition for “quality” when it relates to children’s nonfiction—single titles or in series.

I got me a brand spankin’ new heart doctor. And she rocks. She listens to me, she explains complicated terms to me, and she gives me practical advice to help my heart out.

But I have to wear another Holter monitor; this time a 48-hour one. Ugh.

But I know it’s all for a good cause. That would be the drama queen that is my heart.

I’ve realized how hard it is for me to let go of the power and just let someone else handle things. It’s probably because I think I could do it better, more efficiently, with more care, etc. I’m such a control freak.

Example: The hubby and I have put in an application to rent a condo in Belleville. We really want to get this place. I mean really badly. It’s the perfect location and size for the two of us, and it has a basement, garage, new appliances, and it overlooks a pond. It will be nice to have water within vision’s distance again.

That being said, we are going through a very nice, on-top-of-it realtor to make contact and follow through with paperwork and such. He’s been great–he makes calls and gets paperwork arranged and to us. The only tough thing is he makes initial contact with the homeowners. He called them on Friday–I know he did because he said he would. And I didn’t hear anything all weekend. So I e-mailed him last night, just to check in. (Can you tell the waiting is just killing me?) He e-mailed back to say that the homeowners just got married and are out-of-town on their honeymoon. Ugh. We’ll have to wait some more.

But the worst of it is is that I want to know what it going on at all times. I want to say, “Call me when you call them, just so I know contact has been made!” I mean, how neurotic am I? I think it’s just that we want this a ton, and there’s a very good chance we’re not going to get it because we wouldn’t be available to move in for another month and a half. If we could get out of our lease, we would have months ago, but alas, we are stuck paying here until December 10. We’re willing to double-up for half a month, but anything more than that is getting a little financially-draining.

He said he’s going to call them again this morning, just to see if they got our info and to tell them how interested we are.

This waiting is just eating me up. What is wrong with me? Oh, yeah. Someone else is in control of the situation. I hate that.

Bigger Questions=Too Much for Three Credits?

I have a feeling parts of my problem statement are just too big. That worries me. I know we all want to answer (or at least help to answer) the big questions, but it’s only three credits.

I haven’t heard back from the prof about the statement, though. I did get feedback from another prof of mine, and he also mentioned the “bigness” of some of my subquestions. *sigh* We’ll see what Ann says, and then go from there. At least it was only a first draft!

Human Subjects

I am gearing up to get the Human Subjects proposal set for review by the Human Subjects Board. I’m told they aren’t difficult to get by–they just might take a while. Considering one of my assignments for Ann’s class is to conduct an interview with a professional, and I want to use that for my project, and I made the deadline November 28th, I should probably get my butt in gear. Just another hurdle to jump. Hopefully a low hurdle.

I know I have been a bit absent from here, but I want to assure you that I’m still posting…to my research blog.

If you want to comment on my postings and questions and musings (and please do! I know some of my colleagues from BSU read this, and you all are where [or have been where] I am now, and I would love your advice!), you can find me here.

I cannot stress how much it would mean to me to have some feedback from everyone who reads here. You all know your stuff. Now I need your help!

Problem Statement, Draft 1

Problem

Overview
Children’s nonfiction publishing is a large and booming business that has been around for many years. This genre of publishing normally sells to schools and libraries, which means the company is marketing to librarians, teachers, administrators, and sometimes even parents. The complication to this set-up is that these constituents are not the end-users—the students are.

There are many parts to a book series, and a great deal of research goes into each series well before it is even pitched to the editorial board and publishers. From what I have observed, there are four parts to the research: What is the competition? How will this series fit into curricula across the nation? How long of a commitment will the publishing house be able to make to this series? How will this be marketed to libraries and schools? From this information, I can begin to see what is important to editors and publishers. But there are questions underlying these seemingly simple inquiries:

–What is a successful book series, and how do we use this information to consistently create high-quality nonfiction literature for children?

– What aspects of the books are generated with the teachers/librarians in mind, and what parts are for the students?

–Furthermore, what aspects come to the fore when marketing?

In essence, this project will help me to understand what is more important—the students’ needs or the bottom line. Or can we balance the two to create a successful series? I hope to prove the latter.

Hopefully, this project will also help other editors and up-and-coming children’s writers learn how to balance the needs of all the users of a children’s nonfiction book series while maintaining the integrity of the content.

Implications
If I am able to create an outline that shows how to balance the needs of all users of a children’s nonfiction series, I may be able to help other editors streamline research and production, as they will be able to balance the needs of all the users without having to backtrack during production if one of the users’ needs suddenly outweighs the others.

Also, after creating the book series with all users’ needs balanced and all the required research outlined clearly, I would like to pitch this idea to several children’s nonfiction book publishers. Hopefully, the series will be accepted, and I could possibly become a freelance editor or writer for them. This project could potentially jump-start my career in book publishing, which is important to me indeed.

Research Question
How do we (children’s nonfiction editors) balance the needs of all the various constituents (parents, teachers, librarians, administrators, students) to produce a quality book series?

Background

Personal
As an editor who wishes to pursue a career specifically in children’s nonfiction, I have a vested interest in the outcomes of this study. After my brief experience in children’s book publishing this summer, I have come to realize the importance of this field—we are shaping the knowledge of children. It’s a big responsibility, though many editors may not realize this. This project may show these editors the importance of their work all the while helping them to create successful, meaningful book series.

Contextual Significance
After having spoken with many authors who are interested in breaking into the field of children’s nonfiction or fiction, I have come to realize the stigma that is associated with the genres. Many writers are concerned that their ideas are too small, or too large, or not right for the field. If I am able to help editors with this process, I may also help writers to put their fears at bay and attempt to get their ideas published.

There are many talented writers who care about children’s literature, but they are put-off by the reputation publishing has. If I am able to create an outline or rubric for writing nonfiction, more ideas may be published, which will also benefit our young people. I can’t think of anything more rewarding than that.

Methodology

Overview
A literature review will be conducted in order to establish this project in the larger context of academia, though from the little research I have done thus far I believe there is nothing specifically on this topic, which allows my project to take the lead in this research but also causes a decent amount of alarm regarding the compiling of a literature review.

On that note, I plan to use theories of user-centered design in order to look at the needs of the users and how they interact. Though there doesn’t seem to be any articles written specifically about user-centered design in regards to book publishing, I hope to use these theories to analyze the editing process in children’s book publishing.

In order to fully understand the process of planning a children’s nonfiction book series, I will be researching and designing a book series that I came up with during a brainstorming session this summer at Lerner Publishing Group. I will do the normal research for a book series, which includes the four questions I summarized in this statement’s overview. I will outline the titles of the books and perhaps the interior, including back matter. I do not plan on writing the books for this project, as time does not allow this sort of commitment, though if the series is picked up by a publisher, I hope to be writing the texts after that point.

Since planning a book series also forces me to look at the process from an author’s standpoint, I will also research what the publishing industry has told writers about getting published. I have already done some preliminary research on how to write and publish for children, and there is a great deal of resources out there on this topic. This information will help me to get into the mindset of the writer and understand their viewpoint on the users, though their focus may be mainly on the students’ needs.

In order to get a handle on book publishing from an editor’s point of view, I will be conducting several interviews with children’s nonfiction book editors. Because there is so little written on editing, especially children’s nonfiction editing, I hope these interviews, and possibly viewing a pitch session, will help to shed light on the editor’s vision of a book series.

Constraints
As an editor with a writing background, I understand that I am able to observe publishing from both viewpoints. This can be helpful but also harmful because I am apt to put the students’ needs first. I do not have much experience with marketing, so this may be a part of my research, as well. I know that publishers need to make money, and editors are an important part of that process, but I have not acquired much information about the marketing process. All that I know I observed this summer during my internship and that is a small view into a large world.

Also in that vein, I understand that much of my knowledge was gleaned from my experience during my internship this summer. It is difficult to separate what I know from this experience, but I hope it will help me to create more coherent and direct questions during interviews and while reading research. I just need to be aware that what I know may not be the norm for all publishing. The interviews with editors will hopefully produce more information on the process.

Deliverables
The final documents for this project will include a book proposal that can (and hopefully will be) pitched to children’s nonfiction publishers and an outline of users’ needs—how they are a part of the book series, and how to maintain the integrity of the success of the book while keeping all needs in check.