Teacher Notes on Description-Writing Exercises

Exercise 9: Revising Wisely (Bone Fracture)

Context for this case:

Prerequisites:
  • Line-numbered draft description.
  • Good, bad sample headings.
  • Good, bad sample illustrations.

Cognitive Apprenticeship Features:
  • Makes revision techniques explicit.
  • Iteratively refines a draft description.

Supporting References:
Relevant CA Content Standards  

Goal:
To review the usability features that make a long description adequate for readers (a search framed by the good-description guidelines), then try to further improve the text by addressing found weaknesses. This exercise thus bridges from recognizing helpful features (practiced in earlier reading or text rebuilding activities) to revising a draft description by creating or adding needed new features. The target description here is not seriously flawed (though incomplete), so this case offers a realistic, gentle introduction to the important skill of self-editing or "revising wisely."

Strategy:
This case differs from its predecessors in three strategic ways:
(1) The topic is biology (the physiology of bone fracture) rather than physics or engineering. (This case is extensively adapted and expanded from Ann Parker, "A New Look at How Aging Bones Fracture," Science and Technology Review, September 15, 2006, available online at http://www/llnl.gov/str/Sep06/Kinney.html.
(2) The focus is not so much a thing as a process (so this case shows how to generalize the good-description guildelines to process descriptions).
(3) In the rebuilding cases (compact disk, sticky notes, fluorescent light), the teacher supplies the headings and figures at the start to help students reconstruct the segmented text. In this case, the teacher supplies the (draft) text at the start and students later improve that text by adding (suggested) headings and figures based on its content.

REAL-LIFE REVISIONS:
In the science world beyond school, most of what scientists and engineers write gets revised, often repeatedly and sometimes extensively, before others rely on it. For example, Kalpana Shankar has published (August, 2007) a revealing ethnographic study of writing in an actual biology laboratory ("Order From Chaos: The Poetics and Pragmatics of Scientific Recordkeeping," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(10):1457-1466, 2007. Go to www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/114293368/issue). Researchers in that lab kept a stack of yellow pads handy to "scrawl down where it's all going" as they worked, and a separate set of bound permanent blue record books. Explained one biologist to Shankar

          ...especially during an experiment [what I write]
          is extremely messy and difficult to read and if
          I went back to it myself many days later I'de
          probably have difficulty interpreting it.  So I
          very shortly write it up into my main laboratory
          books...it's much clearer after that (p. 1461).
Hence, among these real-life scientists, careful scheduled text revision is in play from the start to make usable research records emerge from bench-science activity. In this exercise, students practice finding and adding just such usability features for technical text.

FINDING TECHNICAL TERMS:
A good description uses (and introduces its readers to) appropriate technical terms for its topic (as noted in "Specifics" under the Content section of the description guidelines). This bone-fracture description uses many such terms, which you can point out as you go through it with students. Some are explained (implicitly defined) within the text:

     cortical bone             lines 11-12
     trabecular bone           lines 13-15
     five named bones          lines 17-27
        vertebra
        femur
        tibia
        humerus
        iliac crest
     resorption                lines 35-36
     turnover                  lines 33-36
     osteoporosis              lines 42-43
     buckling                  lines 67, 76-79
Other technical terms are used here but never explained:
     lattice                   line 14
     collagen                  line 15
     trabecula(e)              line 29
     tomography                line 51
You can explain these terms, have students look up their meanings, or discuss for which audiences including a definition of each within the description text would be a good use of space.

FINDING COMPARISONS:
Comparisons (and negative comparisons or contrasts; see "contrast classes" at (4) in the teacher notes on Exercise 0) are a very practical way to introduce new information by connecting it (positively or negatively) to other, more familiar, things. You and your students can find (and discuss the explanatory contributions of) quite a few useful comparisons throughout the bone-fracture description. Examples include:

     Positive comparisons--
         "fracture more easily"      line 2
         sponges                     lines 29-30
         dented can                  lines 76-82

     Negative contrasts--
         solid/lattice structure     lines 9-15
         balanced/unbalanced
             turnover                lines 40-41
         short struts/long columns   lines 54-58
         young/old bone stress       lines 60-64

FINDING OTHER USABILITY FEATURES:
The guidelines recommend several other text usability features that also appear in this description. Among those for which students can search and whose role you can review are these:

ADDING HEADINGS:
The writer of every useful long description needs to organize the text carefully and reveal to the reader what that organization is (first section of the good-description guidelines). The first two sentences in this case reveal that this process description has a problem/solution structure, a common pattern in science text. The first sentence poses the problem and the second announces the solution that the rest of the description provides.

(A) Placing Headings. Normally section headings would reveal (visually outline) the organization of a description as long as this one. All have been omitted here to create an activity opportunity for students. You can offer the class a set of (good) candidate headings (perhaps printed on large sheets of paper and distributed randomly) and invite students (or groups) to propose a "best location" for each candidate. For example, here is a list of helpful headings for this description and their likely insertion points:

          Overview                line 1
          Bone Structure          line 8
          Bone Turnover           line 32
          Loss of Density         line 39
          Trabecular Shape Change line 50
          Trabecular Pitting      line 70

Adding such headings is an authentic, valuable part of text revision that requires students to understand the overall gist of the description, not just its isolated sentences. (Scrambling the candidate headings eliminates trivial guessing.)

(B) Evaluating Headings. Distinguishing between appropriate headings (those that show readers the actual text structure) and inappropriate ones (too broad, too narrow, just decorative) is a related, more demanding, revision skill. Students can practice that skill too if you offer a few bad headings, either after placing the good set or mixed among them for a more challenging exercise. Here are some sample inappropriate headings for this bone-fracture description (all are topics mentioned in the text, often in many places, but none clarifies the text's problem/solution structure no matter where they are put):

          Tomography
          Bone Resorption
          Trabeculae
          Building Blocks of the Spine
Comparing the signalling roles, the help provided to readers, of the good and bad candidate headings reveals to students that headings should do more than visually break up long stretches of text. They should also add useful intellectual content on their own.

ADDING FIGURES:
Text and figures (pictures) often complement each other in technical publications. Earlier exercises showed students how relevant, well-placed figures can enrich and clarify a description. For example,

This exercise approaches text-figure integration from the other direction. The bone-fracture draft description contains no figures, but it could benefit from some. Hence, revising it provides a chance for students to practice two important skills:
(1) selecting and placing figures to supplement the words available, and
(2) distinguishing appropriate, helpful figures from inappropriate, unhelpful candidates when self-editing (for background, see Edward Tufte's website).
As with illustrated instructions, I always point out to students that the same basic usability principles (summarized in the guidelines) that yield good descriptive text also yield good descriptive graphics (although implementation is visual rather than purely verbal).

(A) Unhelpful Possible Figures. Many pictures vaguely related to this description but not really helpful for improving it are available in textbooks and online. Two that I have used effectively in class are (linked but not reproduced here for copyright reasons):

(B) Helpful Possible Figures. In contrast to the poor choices above, here are two alternative figures that easily enrich the bone-fracture description (from Ann Parker's article):

Students should always be on the lookout for (guideline-inspired) ways to make even good text better, and the same applies to good graphics. Useful as they already are, the trabecular-bone and young/old-vertebrae figures could still be improved in these ways (which you can prompt students to suggest or explore):

  1. Add simple, clear labels (like the two already indicating the two kinds of bone structure) to unambiguously identify other key visual features.
  2. Supply a caption for each figure (a sentence or two that spells out the picture's role and summarizes its content for readers).
  3. Mention each figure in the text ("...as shown in Figure 2") so readers know when to consult it.
  4. Add a scale to show at a glance the 4-mm edge of the tomographic image.
  5. Explain the use of "false color" here (vertebrae are not really bright orange against a black background, but those colors were artificially introduced simply to help the human eye better interpret the computed image).

The four figures offered here are by no means the only ones that you could discuss when revising the bone-fracture draft description. These examples nicely demonstrate the skill-building potential of this activity, however.

Case:
How Old Bones Fracture [Lines Numbered for Reference]
  1 

  2 Old bones fracture more easily than

  3 young ones, even under small amounts

  4 of stress.

  5 This is partly because old bones lose

  6 density, but partly because they also

  7 change their structure.

  8 

  9 Many human bones contain two different

 10 internal structures.

 11 Some central tissue is quite solid

 12 (cortical bone).

 13 Other tissue, however, contains a

 14 cellular foam or open-celled lattice

 15 of collagen (trabecular bone).

 16 Trabecular bone occurs in

 17    * individual parts of the spine

 18      (vertebrae),

 19    * the femur (the long bone that joins

 20      the knee to the hip),

 21    * the tibia (the larger of the two

 22      bones connecting the knee to the

 23      ankle),

 24    * the humerus (the long bone linking

 25      the shoulder to the elbow), and

 26    * the iliac crest (the widest part of

 27      the hip bone).

 28 

 29 Trabeculae are like sponges.

 30 They absorb loads from the joints just as

 31 Styrofoam absorbs impacts in packages.

 32 

 33 All bone renews itself regularly.

 34 The human body continuously removes

 35 old bone (resorption) and replaces it

 36 with new bone (formation).

 37 The average bone turnover rate is

 38 about 6 years.

 39 

 40 In menopausal women, however, this

 41 turnover process becomes unbalanced.

 42 More bone is resorbed that is formed,

 43 so bone density decreases (osteoporosis).

 44 Medical treatments for osteoporosis

 45 usually focus on stopping resorption

 46 of old bone while still allowing new

 47 bone to fill in.

 48 Reducing turnover in this way leaves

 49 bone more massive yet also more brittle.

 50 

 51 Three-dimensional computed-tomography

 52 images reveal a structural change in

 53 human trabecular bone with age.

 54 In young bone, the trabeculae form a web

 55 of short, stubby struts.

 56 In older bone, on the other hand, these

 57 trabeculae are mostly long, slender

 58 columns.

 59 

 60 Fracture (failure) in younger bones

 61 usually happens when stress overcomes

 62 the strength of the bone tissue.

 63 Fracture in older bones happens at

 64 much lower stress levels.

 65 The long, thin trabeculae in old bones

 66 are unstable.

 67 Hence, when compressed, they buckle at

 68 far lower stresses than bone tissue

 69 normally withstands.

 70 

 71 Bone resorption forms small pits on the

 72 surface of the trabeculae.

 73 As bone turnover increases, the number

 74 of pits increases too.

 75 

 76 An empty aluminum can requires much

 77 stress to crush it axially.

 78 But with a small dent in its side wall

 79 the can buckles easily.

 80 In the same way, trabecular pits are

 81 themselves enough to destabilize

 82 bone lattice.

 83 In old human bone, 60% of trabeculae

 84 are vulnerable to buckling just because

 85 of their pits.
  
Note:
This exercise most closely supports the following California Science content standard(s).
Grades 9-12, Investigation and Experimentation:
"Students will formulate explanations using logic and evidence." (1d)
"Students will investigate a science-based societal issue...and communicate the findings." (1m)
"Students will communicate the steps and results from an investigation in written reports and oral presentations...[including] the logical connection among hypotheses, science concepts, tests conducted, data collected, and conclusions drawn from the scientific evidence." (7e, 7c)

This exercise most closely supports the following California English-Language Arts content standard(s).
Grades 9 and 10:
Reading:
"Critique the logic of functional documents by examining the sequence of information and procedures in anticipation of possible reader misunderstandings." (2.7)
Writing:
"Use precise language, action verbs, sensory details, appropriate modifiers, and the active rather than passive voice." (1.2)
"Revise writing to improve the logic and coherence of the organization and controlling perspective, the precision of word choice, and the tone by taking into consideration the audience, purpose, and formality of the text." (1.9)
"Include visual aids...anticipate and address readers' potential misunderstandings, biases, and expectations." (2.3e)
"Use technical terms and notations accurately." (2.3f)


Contact: T.R. Girill trgirill@acm.org