18 of 20 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Who was the audience?, August 13, 2005
This review is from: Scientists Must Write: A Guide to Better Writing for Scientists, Engineers and Students (Routledge Study Guides) (Paperback)
I can not recommend this book.
I wanted to like it. I write, a lot, about technical topics, and am convinced that proper training improve my writing. A few pages in, I found so many errors, both minor and major, that I lost the hope this book would help.
Minor things included the author's micro-management of whether dates in business letters should be punctuated. (Yes or no, can you guess what he requires? Does it matter?) Another minor point was insistence that a certain line in a business memo be underlined. Underlining was never a great way to emphasize text, and has gotten worse since the 1970s writing of the first edition. Underlining has come to mean "link" in the Web era, and it's safe to assume that most memoranda will be viewed electronically. Underlined but unclickable text causes confusion, and causes more confusion if a paper document is ever fed to an OCR scanner. Text recognition is dicey at best, and adding junk to the letterforms can never help.
The major problems include notebooks, resumes, and basic English usage. Scientific and engineering notebooks can sometimes approach the status of legal documents. Proper notes can establish primacy of discovery, and can affect the validity of valuable patents. The best notebooks are permanently bound with printed page numbers, giving some assurance that pages weren't added or removed at some later date. Many engineers also favor grid-ruled pages, for aligning text, as 'training wheels' for uncertain sketching skills, and as aids in tables and graphs. Barrass recommends a combination of lined and unlined pages, interleaved from different sources. I'm glad he discusses professional note-taking at all, but I'm disappointed by the discussion.
Ditto examples. It's great that he presented real text from real publications for critique, and that he stresses the importance of critique. He is simply wrong, however, in asserting (p.36) that "[change] unequalled in magnitude MEANS unequalled." Changes may differ in magnitude, in speed, in visibility, and in as many more dimensions as a creative reader can imagine. I agree that the phrase may be ungainly, and may not be appropriate to the rest of the cited text. Still, it is worthwhile for the writer to point out which aspect of change is under discussion, an idea that Barrass denies.
His suggested resume (p.28) addresses only the needs of a high-schooler (is this the scientist who must write?), and addresses those badly. It really is as grim as you may imagine. The suggested cover letter (p.27) would be pathetic even for a high-schooler. It never even mentions the job's content, let alone the reason that the applicant feels qualified to apply for the job.
I admit, I made it only 36 pages into the 190+ of this book. In those first four chapters, however, I found so much bad advice that I simply could not believe the rest of the book would repay the time spent in reading it. Perhaps the next 150+ pages were filled with wisdom, but my budget of trust for this author is bankrupt. I leave it to the next reviewer to describe the good in this book.
//wiredweird
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
4.0 out of 5 stars
Should be required reading of graduating seniors in math and computer science, February 26, 2011
This review is from: Scientists Must Write: A Guide to Better Writing for Scientists, Engineers and Students (Routledge Study Guides) (Paperback)
People in all areas of science, mathematics and technology must be able to write clearly, concisely and accurately. While in most cases, a failure to do so leads to a bit of confusion and a correction being published, in a few cases the failure to communicate clearly can be mission critical or life threatening. In this book, Barrass dispenses some excellent advice regarding how to execute technical communication; I compare it favorably to the classic, "The Elements of Style" by Strunk and White. Effective written and oral delivery of technical information are both covered.
Reading this book should be a mandatory requirement for all graduating seniors in computer science and mathematics. One of the most common criticisms of recent graduates in computer science that businesses state is an inability of those graduates to communicate effectively in both oral and written form. A careful reading in combination to some practice will have a very positive affect on the impression that the graduate will make on potential employers. Finally, even longtime professionals will find that reading this book will lead to an improvement in their communication skills.
Published in Journal of Recreational Mathematics, reprinted with permission
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
