I am interested in any ratio people have noticed either in college or work experience. What is the general ratio between reading and writing for example for a particular research report. For every three hours you read is there one hour of writing you are able to gleen from what you have read?

Views: 112

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Depends on what you do, the purpose for which you're writing, and how well you know what you're talking about.  As you learn more, it takes less research to get your bearings and make your point.

 

I'm an attorney.  I don't write many "research reports" anymore.  For the most part, I write more than I research.  For the occasional wild-goose-chase motion or brief, I'll have to research longer than I write -- but that doesn't happen all that often.  Writing is production.  Research is overhead.  I try to reduce the latter as much as I can.

 

I imagine a history writer, for instance, might answer differently.

 

JB

I work with lots of different types of data and I practically never write anything like a paper one does in school. I do have to do "research" sometimes like when I had to understand geodetics and how a datum and projections work together. My end product is information supplied to the correct individuals that is loaded into a program or all summed up in a spreadsheet.

In college I think it was a 1:1 as I was in the physics program where the research papers were more based on the experiments performed as were the research papers I wrote for my assistantship. In most of my other classes it was more heavily weighted towards reading during my undergraduate but for the MBA it was more time spent writing than reading.
For my current position It is more writing than reading.

RSS

Latest Activity

manInTheMaking replied to Todd Serveto's discussion Revolting, Macabre Details About Planned Parenthood's Gruesome Barbarism--Where Are The Excuses? in the group The Great Debate
"we will have to agree to disagree. "
29 minutes ago
Michael D. Denny replied to Todd Serveto's discussion Revolting, Macabre Details About Planned Parenthood's Gruesome Barbarism--Where Are The Excuses? in the group The Great Debate
"Incorrect. When your intent is to end the life of an innocent human being whose single and only crime is that of existing, that is malicious intent. Thus, it is murder. It is black and white."
36 minutes ago
John White posted a status
"better to be hated for what you are, than loved for what you are not."
47 minutes ago
manInTheMaking replied to Todd Serveto's discussion Revolting, Macabre Details About Planned Parenthood's Gruesome Barbarism--Where Are The Excuses? in the group The Great Debate
"Point 1 sure. of course. Point 2 I would think that to be the case. What is not fact is Murder.  Murder by definition implies malicious intent.  There is none in the cases I provided.  And again it is not black and white."
48 minutes ago
John White replied to Moe Kanz's discussion Long hair gents...
"the real question is -why do you give a shit about my problems? you're nothing but a troll, most likely with a small dick issue. "
50 minutes ago
manInTheMaking replied to Todd Serveto's discussion Revolting, Macabre Details About Planned Parenthood's Gruesome Barbarism--Where Are The Excuses? in the group The Great Debate
"I try not to nitpick about these things, but that is a blatant run-on sentence. Have some respect for the people reading your post. Grahmer is not my strong suit, but I think I got the point across.  BTW this comment was really meant for the…"
52 minutes ago
Sir replied to John Muir's discussion Donald Trump Is A Greedy, Creepy, Ignorant Jerk in the group The Great Debate
"Not defending Trump.  Shuddering at McCain.  "
57 minutes ago
Gentleman Engineer replied to Todd Serveto's discussion Revolting, Macabre Details About Planned Parenthood's Gruesome Barbarism--Where Are The Excuses? in the group The Great Debate
"I concur."
59 minutes ago

© 2015   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service