DeafLamb

Many of you right remember this thread:

https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=172319

In which I asked for your help with my research paper. Many of you helped and I thank you all for it. A lot of you also asked that I post the paper when I'm done. Sorry it took so long for me to post it. I've been thru-hiking the AT for the past two months so computer usuage has been a little scetchy. I'm off the trail in VA though for a few days to let my feet heal. So here is the paper. Thanks again everyone for all your help. Oh and in case your wondering, the grade was an A. I don't even think I deserve it though cause I definitly rushed the last bit of the paper as I was getting ready to go hiking. Thanks again.

Ray

Guest

I like the paper.

A few things- I don't know if you're graduating or not, but if you are, continue taking english composition classes in college- two or three semesters worth of writing ought to solidify your writing skills. You clearly have an enthusiasm for your topics, and it would be a shame for people to write you off because your grammar is incorrect, or your spelling is off.

Triple check your work- then pass it off to a couple of other "experts" who can ensure that you're not making the mistakes I saw there: using the wrong word (ie: "where" for "were"), using contractions, not using punctuation correctly, misuse of tense, etc.

It's always good to state your opinions, then back them up with support, but ancedotal comments just don't fly with a research paper. Leave that stuff out. It doesn't do anything towards proving your point, so there's no need for it.

Otherwise, an enjoyable read.

Koffee

Little Darwin

Nice read! I really enjoyed the insight and enthusiasm of your paper.

The rest of this message may sound like I am being critical, and in a sense I am, but I hope you will view it as constructive criticism to be applied to any future papers.

To start, I echo Koffee's comments about taking more composition courses.

It irked me a little, as a reader, to read some of the little errors that should be caught in proof-reading. However, I found myself thinking that this needed a larger change.

I have been taught that it is the best practice to state clearly the opposing view and either address it or admit that there is indeed a weakness in my own position. You did this at a surface level, but it could have gone deeper. In fact, I have been told by at least two different professors that I should be willing, during the process of creating a research paper, to change my personal position if that is where the research leads me.

For example, it would have added credibility to your paper to show a more balanced view. To cite some anti-bicycling information to show that you are not simply presenting a digest of cycle cummuting propoganda.

The second point is an offshoot of the first. To do what I am suggesting, it would be necessary to limit your thesis to a more specific aspect of cycle commuting, or lengthen the paper significantly.

For example, a thesis "Bicycle commuting is cost effective"... Which you did present as one of your main points, but you could have expanded on it and limited the scope of your paper. What about if you want/need to have a car for other purposes, is cycling still financially beneficial? How could this be addressed? What about the cost of installing shower facilities, special sensors etc? I think the 7 cents per mile could have been expanded on... since reimbursement is based on out of pocket expenses, this proves that cycling is more cost effective (reimbursement for cars is currently 35+ cents per mile) The reimbursement per mile is an average anticipated cost, so someone decided that it costs 7 cents a mile to commute by bicycle. Locating and citing that source would have been great! (In reading your paper, it read as a nice incentive to use a bicycle, but it missed the fiscal element).

To close on a positive note, your paper had one thing that many academic papers lack, and that is your personal touch. It was not just a dry recitation of facts. It told me as a reader something about the topic that I can't get from raw numbers and statistics. A personal touch is a good thing, for readability and engaging the reader. But, as Koffee said, don't count on your opinions carrying any weight in proving your point unless backed up with hard evidence from a credible source.

BTW - I am just curious... What is your current educational level?

ItsJustMe

Interesting paper with lots of nice passages. Transitions seem a little harsh; it seems like it really hops around and could flow more easily.

It's interesting that you dismiss CO2 so easily, since it's also one of the worst things that cars put out; it's a pretty bad greenhouse gas. The main point is that humans put out a heck of a lot less, and they put out some amount of it anyway.

The only major issue I don't see addressed is that of safety. It'll be sure to come up, whether you try to avoid it or not. In reality it probably should not be avoided; bicycling is actually about as safe as driving a car, and when health benefits are factored in, your life expectancy will increase due to cycling.

Here's a TXT version for folks without MS Word.

Banzai

Unfortunately my friend, to post a work of prose in any public forum is to expose it to criticism as well as praise. I do hope you take the criticism to be well intended, and I feel comfortable speaking for all the previous posters that it was, and that in the end we're all very impressed with both your efforts and intentions. Kudos to you! Any effort in writing, particularly if it is something meaningful to you, is something to be proud of.

Now, if I may pile on a bit...

Voice: This paper has a lot more voice to it than many "research" papers. It is, however, interesting to me that your voice sounds more natural when you transition to the "non-fiction" or research body of the paper, than it does in your narrative introduction. Transitions get smoother, and you "sound" more relaxed. Something to consider, when looking at your own writing...why would that be?

Mechanics: I won't beat this horse anymore. I think Koffee and dgregory have it covered.

Consistency: The section on bicycle history was very interesting to me. A lot of stuff in there I didn't know, and will "file away" for future use at parties. (Seriously, it really was interesting.) It also didn't contribute to your point/thesis. (By the by, I somehow lost your thesis in that narrative...I'll go back and look again later.) Had your paper been longer, and I assume there was a word limit, that may have been an appropriate sidebar. Given the length, I feel it took up a disproportionate volume of the alloted text, words which could have been used to give more academic "ammunition" to your main thesis. But it did seem like just a fascinating and lengthy sidebar.

Academics: Cars are a menace. I saw a guy yesterday in a frackin behemoth SUV spewing black smoke blitz through a red light.
See what I just did? I started by throwing out a generality, and proving it with an anecdote. However, your paper indicates that you are clearly more intelligent than Sean Hannity's readers, and you weren't guilty of this throughout the entire paper either. For the most part your citations covered your statements. I'm going to be lazy now and not go back and pull for reference the instances in which you used this "technique", but keep an eye on that. It's easier to fall into that trap the more strongly you feel about an issue. However, that kind of academic sloppiness only flies on Fox "News".

Overall: Your passion is commendable, and your effort laudable. I know my post, and the posts of those before me sound highly critical, but believe me when I say it's a good paper, and you should be proud of it. We're only chucking spears because it was placed before us to do so, and to quote one of the most trite aphorisms ever, "because we care."

Good job dude!

bonehead

DeafLamb,
Ignore the criticism. I do this for a living, so I am sure your intent was to illustrate the given information on a content level rather than focusing on surface grammar. I enjoyed your paper. Listen to your professors, they are the experts.

Cheers

DeafLamb

I'm open to all the criticism, thanks guys for caring. I know my grammer and mechanics are poor. I've struggled with the english language all my life (yes it is my first language). Your just lucky I ran the paper through a spell checker or I would really be flamed right now.

Someone asked my education level. With that paper I finished the last course to get a 2 year degree in science from my local community college. After my hike in september I'll be transfering to a four year school in Oregon.

I would have had people proof read my paper and really polish it off if I had the time. I literally wrote the last paragraph a day before driving down to Gerogia. I will take more composition classes to improve my writing skills. I know writing papers is something I will definitly need to do in sciences.

Thanks again

Ray (or you can call me my trailname of "Sunshine" )

Banzai

Sunshine,

I hope you don't think that I or others were flaming your post/paper. That clearly wasn't the intent. I enjoyed it, and I applaud not only the fact that you wrote it, but that you also chose to post it here. Your confession about struggling with composition skills is an indication as well of the "cahones" it probably took to publicly post your paper, and the fact that you are justifiably proud of it.

Banzai

Um. Now to be genuinely harsh. Content gets lost if you are sloppy with your language, "surface grammar", and mechanics.

Language, and its use, is very important...and it is the vehicle that conveys your content.

You do this for a living?

huhenio

Peer review your english is the only criticism, but besides that you have your own "voice". I liked the paper a lot.

Little Darwin

Congratulations on your degree, and good luck on your continued academic journey.

And again, I did find much value in reading your paper...

cooker

Unintended or intended irony? This shows the problem with spell checkers: no context. There's no substitute for knowing grammar and checking it you're self.
R

cooker

And I thought it was an excellent paper.

oboeguy

Are you hiking the AT?!?

DeafLamb

I am hiking the AT. Right now I am in the Shenandoahs. I had to get off the trail for a few days because I switched to sandals. The sandals actually work fine for hiking, but my feet where not expecting the sudden exposure to fresh air. They dried out within 24 hours and started to crack really badly. I've used some superglue to close the cracks and they are feeling much better. I expect to be back on the trail Wed.

Thanks again everyone for your comments on my paper. The flaming comment was just a joke, I really do value all your comments. My skin is pretty thick and if impropper grammer is all I have to worry about in my life then I am well ahead of the curve. There are somethings we are good at and others that we are not so good at. I'll concentrate on what I'm good at, and work to improve those things that I'm not.

Has anyone ever noticed that people who are bad at chemistry or calculus don't get as much grief as those who are bad at english? No worries...

Ray

P.S. In case anyone is interested you can sort of follow my hike at:

www.trailjournals.com/sunshine06

oboeguy

Wow, a BF member hiking the AT. What can I say, I am very jealous. I've hiked 1% of the AT, around Bear Mt. in NY. We''re thinking of going back up there one day this year by car to drop some trail magic on the thru-hikers going by. I'd love to take 4-5 months away from life and hike it with my better half (who is similarly inclined). Yes the pull is so great that I'd give-up a season of cycling to do it! Who knows, maybe one day... Your trail journal is neat. I can enjoy the trail vicariously this way.

BTW, those who are bad at chemistry or calculus don't get grief... they get fired!

Urbanmonk

Caution, my friend, "The written word is all too revealing."