The Spiral approach in writing

[Ralphie ★]

I like it and wish it was used more.  I remember the term from text books.  They said they would start with the basics and get progressively more detailed. Really, what else would make more sense?  Or any sense atoll?  I have a liberry book that looks pretty dense and fairly impenetrable. I would love if in addition to the table of contents they had a section with like one paragraph or page per chapter.  Very rarely you will see a sentence or two of explanation at the beginning of a chapter. 

Also I really like when each page has the chapter title in its heading. I am talking mainly non-fiction books here but it might also be nice for fiction. 

I recently read a book aboot quests. One I might like is to do some kind of reading one, like at least one book from every Dewey major section, and could dive into the subsections optionally. 

BTW, I think books are in their best light (owl take the pun) compared to electronic when read in nice ootside daylight.
 

Hmm, interesting that they say the spiral approach is used in education in China and India. And that it is similar to the well known journalistic inverted pyramid. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_approach

[MoseySusan ★]

3 hours ago, Philander Seabury said:

And that it is similar to the well known journalistic inverted pyramid. 

Freshmen journalism students had a hard time making the transition from the essay/story style they had learned in English classes to inverted pyramid. They wanted to keep the point a secret, suspense and irony, organize details from least to most important so their writing would culminate in a powerful, irrefutable idea. 

Nope. 

Feature writing allows for more abstract expression, so we published more feature than news. 

They also resisted limiting their use of intensifier adverbs.   

[shootingstar]

25 minutes ago, MoseySusan said:

Freshmen journalism students had a hard time making the transition from the essay/story style they had learned in English classes to inverted pyramid. They wanted to keep the point a secret, suspense and irony, organize details from least to most important so their writing would culminate in a powerful, irrefutable idea. 

Nope. 

Feature writing allows for more abstract expression, so we published more feature than news. 

They also resisted limiting their use of intensifier adverbs.   

Well, the inverted pyramid for journalistic style isn't totally different from essay-writing banging off with the thesis statement in opening paragraph but maybe the essay paragraph is slightly more ornate. However, the sad thing these days of social media attention, one has write a truly grabby opening line for inverted.  

I agree feature writing sometimes results in lopsided over-focus on part of a subject matter. 

 

[Thaddeus Kosciuszko]

When I write engineering studies or concept reports I include an Executive Summary.  Typically one paragraph; a maximum of two. It describes the study or report from a high level, with the details in the following sections and supporting information and calculations in the appendices.  So, start at the beginning and get into as much detail as you want - but you'll still get basic understanding of the project if you abandon reading after the first few pages.

I think it's funny when I get back comments on a customer's review of draft reports, such as 'Your executive summary is only one paragraph and lacks detail.  Please expand to include more paragraphs and include more detail.' 

[Square Wheels]

14 hours ago, Thaddeus Kosciuszko said:

'Your executive summary is only one paragraph and lacks detail.  Please expand to include more paragraphs and include more detail.'

 

[maddmaxx ★]

14 hours ago, Thaddeus Kosciuszko said:

When I write engineering studies or concept reports I include an Executive Summary.  Typically one paragraph; a maximum of two. It describes the study or report from a high level, with the details in the following sections and supporting information and calculations in the appendices.  So, start at the beginning and get into as much detail as you want - but you'll still get basic understanding of the project if you abandon reading after the first few pages.

I think it's funny when I get back comments on a customer's review of draft reports, such as 'Your executive summary is only one paragraph and lacks detail.  Please expand to include more paragraphs and include more detail.' 

When I designed the PLC program that ran the Pratt & Whitney test cells there were about 150 subroutines that could be called from the main menu.  They were all written in "rung" format (looks like electrician prints).  All were printed and placed in a large ring binder in folders by numerical order.  Each subroutine printout contained a list of all of the 150 or so E sized prints that it touched upon and all prints had a list of subroutines that involved that print.  The important part however was at the front of each subroutine and that was one page or less of text describing how that subroutine worked if everything went well.  Typically a troubleshooter (electrician or test cell tech) would go on a trouble call with the book, the sticks of E sized prints and a laptop that could plug into the cell and watch the program at work.  It became a relatively quick method to see what should be working, what wasn't working and what components might be at fault.

Example:  The test cell will not allow the engine to begin the start sequence.  The program shows that the operator door into the test cell is not closed.  A quick visual inspection shows the door closed but the limit switch box that measures door closed is hanging by one screw and not touching the door.  Problem fixed quickly.

That first paragraph quickly reminds the technician of how that subroutne works.  The detail is in the actual software printout and on the prints.  It was designed to point the trouble shooter to the problem in a quick straight forward manner without a lot of guesswork and testing.

[MickinMD ★]

22 hours ago, Philander Seabury said:

I like it and wish it was used more.  I remember the term from text books.  They said they would start with the basics and get progressively more detailed. Really, what else would make more sense?  Or any sense atoll?  I have a liberry book that looks pretty dense and fairly impenetrable. I would love if in addition to the table of contents they had a section with like one paragraph or page per chapter.  Very rarely you will see a sentence or two of explanation at the beginning of a chapter. 

Also I really like when each page has the chapter title in its heading. I am talking mainly non-fiction books here but it might also be nice for fiction. 

I recently read a book aboot quests. One I might like is to do some kind of reading one, like at least one book from every Dewey major section, and could dive into the subsections optionally. 

BTW, I think books are in their best light (owl take the pun) compared to electronic when read in nice ootside daylight.
 

Hmm, interesting that they say the spiral approach is used in education in China and India. And that it is similar to the well known journalistic inverted pyramid. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_approach

I don't know about the terminology in Chinese and Indian education, but American education is structured on identifying a student's or classes strengths and weaknesses, and building up to the final, complex learning but covering small bits of prerequisite knowledge at a time.  That sounds like the "spiral approach."

But the method is much more complex than simply going from low to high detail and complexity.  For example, American educators identify the academic level and age of the students being taught and their abilities to handle each of the Five Dimensions of learning, that range from simple memorization and physically handling things to abstract thinking to analyzing one's own thinking.  I loved teaching, for example, the gifted and talented chemistry and physics classes, because I could hit them with new methods and they caught on right away.  For example, in their lab experiments 4 x 3 = 10, not 12, because 4 and 3 are numbers measured to 1 digit (1 significant figure) and we don't know, for example, if 4 is 3.6, 4.4 or something in between so we have to round 12 to 10: one non-zero significant figure.  Additionally, in science 4.5 rounds to 4, not 5, because we "round to even" and 4.5 + 5.5, which add up to 10, rounds to 4 + 6 = 10 instead of rounding up where 5 + 6 =11 as we were taught to do in our first arithmetic classes!  That's a difficult things for kids to unlearn and learn and, with avg. kids, a lot more explanation, detail and time was needed to teach the lesson.  The gifted kids might not have clearly understood the reasoning behind it all, but they understood and applied it right away!