On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Jen Stokes - jstokes jstokes@clarkson.edu wrote:
I would hesitate to send a draft form out campus wide for review and criticism as I fear it would take several years to agree upon a final draft!
Well, that IS the problem with involving more people in a design. The creator needs to decide whether local expertise could help by improving decisions or hinder by adding to the decision load. For example, I think that the physical plant folks should be consulted whenever any sidewalk is laid out -- because they're going to have to keep them safely clear of snow in the winter. I'm looking at the walks currently being laid around Old Main and I would venture to guess that nobody was asked "Are there any changes we would make the physical plant's job of plowing them easier?" That's my concern -- that we're all on the same team and we should seek ways to work with each other.
In my opinion, there's at least a trillion dollars sitting on the table for anybody who could help institutions like ours cooperate internally more effectively.
Although I don't claim to be an expert in technical writing, the old adage is that you should defer to terminology that is already universally excepted to increase the likelihood of comprehension. "Home" and "Host" institution are universally understood, not only because they have been used for decades in our own arrangement, but also across the US and even when referring to international exchange arrangements between institutions (study abroad). There is a great deal of shared meaning embedded in those terms already; to abandon them for others not used as the standard (though the point is a good one regarding abbreviations/similar beginning letters leading to confusion as well as how online forms might necessitate change) might not be ideal in the end. I would have also used Home and Host and define them (as was done).
Having said that, I agree that people often work in isolation when input might yield more creative and better solutions; however, sometimes required collaboration leads to paralysis as well.
Have a great weekend!
Courtney Johnson-Woods Director, Writing Center | Instructor, Department of Communication & Media Clarkson University | 139 Bertrand Snell Hall | PO Box 5760 Ph: 315-268-4439 email: cwoods@clarkson.edu
From: general_discussion-bounces@lists.clarkson.edu [general_discussion-bounces@lists.clarkson.edu] on behalf of Russell Nelson [rnnelson@clarkson.edu] Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 12:49 PM To: general_discussion@lists.clarkson.edu Subject: Re: [CU Discussion] Cross registration document
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Jen Stokes - jstokes jstokes@clarkson.edu wrote:
I would hesitate to send a draft form out campus wide for review and criticism as I fear it would take several years to agree upon a final draft!
Well, that IS the problem with involving more people in a design. The creator needs to decide whether local expertise could help by improving decisions or hinder by adding to the decision load. For example, I think that the physical plant folks should be consulted whenever any sidewalk is laid out -- because they're going to have to keep them safely clear of snow in the winter. I'm looking at the walks currently being laid around Old Main and I would venture to guess that nobody was asked "Are there any changes we would make the physical plant's job of plowing them easier?" That's my concern -- that we're all on the same team and we should seek ways to work with each other.
In my opinion, there's at least a trillion dollars sitting on the table for anybody who could help institutions like ours cooperate internally more effectively. _______________________________________________ General_Discussion mailing list General_Discussion@lists.clarkson.edu http://lists.clarkson.edu/mailman/listinfo/general_discussion To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.clarkson.edu/mailman/, select this list and use the 'unsubscribe or edit options' button at the bottom of the page.
general_discussion@lists.clarkson.edu