Review Guidelines |
||||
|
PLEASE READ THIS! I receive a lot of reviews, many of which don't even mention what was taught in a workshop. This page tells what I'm looking for in a review. Note, however, that the maintainers of this site reserve the right to refuse to post any reviewpositive or negativefor any reason whatsoever. AS OF MAY, 2000, THE POSTING OF NEW REVIEWS IS ON HOLD FOR THE NEXT FEW MONTHS. YOU CAN SUBMIT THEM, BUT THEY WONT GO UP IMMEDIATELY.
Reviews should be fairly fleshed-out. Many reviews say "I really had a great time." While good feelings are an important part of a review, mention of content, specific skills gained, and the administration of the program (food, lodging, etc.) are also important elements. My rule of thumb is: if it sounds like it belongs on the back of a brochure, it is probably too "salesy." If it touches on multiple topics, and includes a mix of right brain ("It was great") and left brain material ("it was great BECAUSE we did skills X, Y, and Z, which let me achieve results A, B, and C"), then it meets my criteria for a review. Ultimately, people read reviews to help decide whether and what to buy. Excellent reviews will include enough information for decision making along several dimensions. Some information is required in order for me to accept a review:
Some information is optional, but will make your review even better:
If you can use the review itself to demonstrate any of the skills you learned, feel free to do so. Milton-Model language, sleight of mouth, and over-use of language patterns will usually result in you being asked to do a rewrite, unless the information is extremely explicit and easy to pick out. Besides, Milton-Model language patterns rarely work in writing. If you decide to use any language patterns, using sensory non-specific predicates and more subtle language patterns works better. That said, good writing is still more important than demonstrating fancy language patterns.
|
|||
© 1993-2008, by Stever Robbins |