2. Dempsey 2
Comprehensive Edit:
Cincinnatus Report on
Minneapolis Institute of the Arts
Interactive Video Exhibits
To: Cincinnatus Writing Team and the
Minneapolis Institute of the Arts
From: Cristin Dempsey
Date: 28 April 2015
3. Dempsey 3
Table of Contents
Letter of Transmittal…………………………………………………………………...……4
Executive Summary, Abstract…………………………………………………………........5
Body of Report…………………………………………………………………………..….6
Rhetorical Analysis………………………………………………………………………….6
- Audience and Readers………………………………………………………………..……6
- Purpose……………………………………………………..……………………………....6
- Use/Context…………………………………………………………………………..…….7
Evaluating the Document…………………………………………………………...………..7
- Content……………………………………………………………………………….……..7
- Organization……………………………………………………………………………..….7
- Visual Design/Navigation……………………………………………………………...…...8
- Appropriateness…………………………………………………………………………….8
- Writing Style………………………………………………………………………………..9
- Illustrations……………………………………………………………………...…………..9
- Accessibility…………………………………………………………………………..……10
- Re-Use……………………………………………………………………………………...10
Establishing the Objectives…………………………………………………………..………11
4. Dempsey 4
28 April 2015
Cincinnatus, Inc. Writing Team
212 3rd
Avenue North
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Dear Cincinnatus Writing Team:
Attached is a report discussing your May 2003 report on your test study on interactive videos at
the Minneapolis Institute of the Arts. The purpose of this report is to identify the original report’s
strengths and provide suggestions for future revisions. It is a writer’s hope to gain as much
readership as possible, and the editor’s job to help make that happen so more people are
interested in and willing to visit the museum’s interactive video exhibits at the museum in the
future.
In the following comprehensive edit, you will find many different comments. These include
background information on report’s audience and reader, the purpose of your report and this
comprehensive edit, and your report’s use and context, in the past, present, and hopefully in the
future. I then go into your report’s strengths and provide suggestions for revision. The elements I
elaborate on include its content, organization, navigation, visual design, appropriateness, writing
style, accessibility, various illustrations, and opportunities for re-use. While I generally found
your report to be well-written, several revisions still need to be made in order for it to be as
effective as possible and attract a strong readership.
Thank you very much for your time and cooperation in this project. If you would like any more
information on this project or any more help during the editing process, please do not hesitate to
contact me at cristin.dempsey@my.uwrf.edu. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Cristin Dempsey
Professional Writer and Editor
5. Dempsey 5
Executive Summary
While your report has a generally professional tone and strong writing style, there is still more
editing needed. The suggestions for revision that I have made are sure to enhance the report and
make it even more organized, easy to navigate, and well laid out. When these revisions are made,
your report can appeal to a wider audience, and may even encourage readers to visit the
interactive video exhibits found at the Minneapolis Museum of the Arts in the future, permitting
that they are still on display for years to come.
Before I began editing and making suggestions for revision, I scanned your report. I read
headings and paragraphs, and then I focused on the various photos and their accompanying
captions. This scan helped me immensely in determining what will need to be revised for the
future. The methods in which I have edited your report and made revisions include a detailed
mark-up. These revisions were made according to a style guide, which I have determined in
order to keep your report consistent and organized.
Mainly, the edits focus on the surface: grammar, spelling, and sentence structure. They also
focus on style, especially writing style. This determines whether the writer is using too much
jargon or complex language or if they are carefully keeping their readers in mind. Focusing on
writing style also includes whether the writer is using an appropriate tone; they need not sound
too pompous or inpatient, but rather as if they are having an informative and friendly
conversation with their readers. Lastly, the edits focus on the design: how the paragraphs and
photos are laid out, how long certain segments are, and whether the paragraphs and photos create
an appropriate and organized balance on the page.
Once I made these edits, I wrote up a conclusion. The mark-up, which is included in the
appendix, includes every detailed edit that I made to your report. Looking at this mark-up is
beneficial, because the writer is able to see exactly what needs to be done in specific areas,
whether it is a small grammatical error, a suggestion to re-word a paragraph, or a request to
change the design of a page completely in order to improve navigation. I hope that these edits
help enhance your report and attract a wider audience for this and future reports done by
Cincinnatus.
Abstract
Attached is a comprehensive edit outlining general information about Cincinnatus’s original
report, its strengths and elements to be improved on, and my further suggestions for revisions.
The comprehensive edit focuses on content, organization, navigation, visual design, illustrations,
appropriateness, writing style, and opportunities in the future for re-use. I believe that once these
revisions are made, it will attract a wider audience and increase readership, because more people
will be engaged and understand its contents. It may even motivate them to visit these interactive
video exhibits at the museum in the future.
6. Dempsey 6
Cristin Dempsey
ENGL 387
Dr. Moline
21 April 2015
Comprehensive Edit: MIA Focus Group Study Report
Rhetorical Analysis
Audience and Readers
The audience and readers to this MIA Focus Group Study report include frequent visitors to the
Minneapolis Museum of Art, as well as individuals who would like to visit the museum’s art
exhibits in the future or have a general interest in the art and history displayed at the museum,
such as artists and art students. The MIA report wants to aim at this audience, because it focuses
on their reactions to different video displays within new and existing exhibits. The reader can tell
that the report tries to cater to their needs and give them honest feedback.
The audience and readers for this comprehensive edit include Dr. Moline, my classmates, writers
at Cincinnatus, and the employees and frequent visitors to the museum. Dr. Moline and my
classmates can benefit from my comprehensive edit, because it challenges them to think
critically about a document and pay close attention to all of its different elements: what is good
and what can be improved. It can also give them ideas on what to look for in their own
documents and comprehensive edits. Employees can benefit from this comprehensive edit,
because every revision to the report brings in more visitors. Readers can benefit from this edit,
because they can provide feedback about what they liked and made sense to them and what they
would like to see done better in the future to enhance their understanding. Lastly, the writers at
Cincinnatus can benefit from this critique, because they can read critiques and make changes
according to what their readers would like to see more or less of. Then, in the future, they can
produce cleaner, clearer, and more interesting/reader-centered reports.
Purpose
The purpose of the MIA report is to inform visitors to the museum about common reactions to
interactive displays within exhibits and what makes it unique. It also teaches readers about what
exactly is in these displays and what the visitor might learn upon visiting it in the future. In
addition, it also takes a look at each video in depth, from length to content and how that affects
the overall meaning. It also discusses first impressions and what attracted visitors to these
exhibits in the first place. Hearing feedback from fellow visitors is always more trustworthy and
persuades people to attend the exhibit.
The purpose of this comprehensive edit is to look at the document for content, grammar, visual
design/navigation, appropriateness, writing style, illustrations, accessibility, and its re-use. All of
these elements together as a whole are essential to the overall effectiveness and strength of the
document. While some of these elements may be well done, other elements can always be
7. Dempsey 7
improved upon, which will help produce cleaner reports and reach a wider audience in the future.
Some of the fallbacks may just be accidental, but it is up to the editor to bring them to the
writer’s attention so that they know to fix it and appear more professional to their readers.
Use/Context
The MIA report was written in May 2003 for the Minneapolis Institute of Arts museum in
Minneapolis, Minnesota. It was written by Cincinnatus, an independent, non-profit research and
planning firm, also based in Minneapolis. According to the report’s “Introduction and
Methodology” section, Cincinnatus conducted three visitor focus groups (each group consisting
of 7-8 visitors), which focused on discussions and gallery visits, all done during regular museum
hours. The study lasted about two and a half hours.
This section adds that no particular visitors were selected for the study; rather, they were picked
at random from a list of frequent visitors provided by the museum. Obviously the visitors’
satisfaction with the videos was observed; however, their reaction to other elements, sound, types
of art, location, duration, interactivity, and text, was also observed for the study. They were not
told what they would be viewing; they were just given instructions on where to go and what to
do. The Introduction and Methodology page also emphasizes that this is a qualitative study,
meaning they studied what visitors did and did not like about certain exhibits, whether they were
learning something from it, and whether it affected them later.
Ethical Aspects
Some of the ethical aspects of the MIA report include that it keeps names and comments of study
participants anonymous. This protects their identity, especially when they mention an aspect of
the interactive videos that can be improved. Another ethical aspect includes waiting to tell
participants exactly what they are viewing until the study begins. This is done so that there are no
pre-conceived notions or strong opinions about a specific exhibit and then wanting to back out of
the study because of past experiences with exhibits. They want to keep the number of users and
feedback consistent, so while not sharing what the participants will be doing is restrictive, it pays
attention to getting the best results as possible.
Evaluating the Document
Content
The content in the MIA report is very detailed and descriptive, and the writers go into depth on
each exhibit’s video, including several photos in order to show the reader exactly what visitors
experienced during the study. The reader can learn a lot about videos for new exhibits and
whether they want to check them out in the future. However, the writer should be careful so that
they do not get too wordy and confuse the reader. Many readers are more attracted to visuals,
such as photographs, and will likely skip over a lot of text. If the content gets too wordy, they
will not want to read it and learn about the videos. Small details can be good for emphasis and
further description, but small groupings and non-repetitive information will keep the reader’s
attention for a longer period of time.
8. Dempsey 8
Organization
The organization in the MIA report is mostly sufficient and easy to follow for readers, but it just
has a few issues that could be revised. I found it odd that the Executive Summary was in bullet
points. While this may be effective for some readers, I feel that it would be more professional in
paragraph format. They can be short paragraphs so as to keep the reader’s attention, but
paragraph format would make it seem as if more thought was put into the document instead of
just a thrown together list. In addition, the executive summary can likely be cut down quite a bit
from its current length. It should only be a page and briefly give an overview of the MIA report;
it does not have to be as wordy as it is. Otherwise, the MIA report is organized well and
therefore fairly easy for visitors and employees to follow for future reference.
Visual Design/Navigation
Because the organization of the MIA report is pretty basic and well done, navigation becomes
smooth for the reader. At its beginning, there is a well-detailed table of contents, and it is able to
easily identify the various sections and images of the report and separate them accordingly.
Within the MIA report, each new topic is introduced with a bold heading with a type size bigger
than the body text, so different sections are easy to find quickly. In addition, some topics
introduce new subtopics. These are bolded as well; but since they are the same type size as the
body text, the reader is able to easily distinguish main topics from subtopics.
However, even though the headings are noticeable and clearly labeled, they may be confusing to
the reader. They are pretty general headings, such as “First Impressions,” “Sounds,” and
“Object-Specific Versus ‘Generic’ Videos.” A reader unfamiliar with the exhibit or the museum
can easily get confused by these, especially if they are just looking for a small, specific section.
Just a few words can be added in order to greatly enhance the understanding of these headings
and give readers a sense of accomplishment once they find what they were looking for.
Examples of enhanced, clearer headings may include: “First Impressions of the Noh Robes,
Mandala, and African Masks,” “Sounds Found in this Exhibit’s Video,” and “Object-Specific
Noh Robe, Mandala, and African Mask Videos Versus General Videos on the Same Topic.”
These may be wordier and take up more room, but they help introduce the topic well and keep
the reader engaged since they are aware about what they are about to read.
Appropriateness
I feel as if the MIA report was appropriate for the audience it represented (the museum’s visitors
and employees). It did not go into depth on every single exhibit in a specific area; instead, it
provided a sample of the most prominent exhibits used in the study and many detailed sections
on each. What I would have liked to see done was more explanation on a connection between the
exhibits: how they were chosen, what similarities visitors noticed, and what story they tell when
fit together. It did not seem like the exhibits shared a very clear connection other than that they
were historical and unique to a specific culture. The text could elaborate a bit more on these
background connections, and it would be most understandable to the reader if they were
combined with connections within the art, such as colors, textures, and patterns.
9. Dempsey 9
Since the MIA report is a report focusing on the interactive videos of the different exhibits, there
were definitely substantial sections related to the video, such as the sound and content. However,
I feel that more emphasis could be put on the video by explaining how it enhances and brings life
to the exhibit, what visitors can learn from them, and what kind of impact technology like this
has on the future. In addition, it may also be good to further discuss the drawbacks of having an
interactive video. Some of these may include that it does not allow the visitor to have an
imagination or their own interpretation of the exhibit, it may be too distracting, or it may be
heard to hear or see, especially for elderly visitors who may be sight or hearing impaired. While
some of these are already discussed, it could be specific, such as who exactly the drawback
affected and when during the test.
Writing Style
The writing style in the MIA report is mostly very professional; the reader can tell that it was
written in a workplace setting. However, it is also personable and attempts to connect with the
reader, whether they are an employee, a frequent visitor, or just checking out the museum for the
first time. Some ways that they did this included gathering direct quotes from the participants
themselves, using lingo that would keep the reader engaged and entertained, and writing in a way
that they would actually speak to the participants or to the reader. I enjoyed this style of writing,
because the writer never came across as too pompous or dull. In order for writing to be effective,
the writer must use vocabulary and sentence structure that the reader can understand and relate
to, and they must be somewhat lively in their writing, whether adding in anecdotes or just
phrasing sentences in a particular way. These writers succeeded at both, which is why the report
is worth reading.
The only thing that should be improved is adding in so many details that the MIA report
becomes too text heavy and therefore laborious for most readers. Ideas do not have to be
repeated many times, and the report does not necessarily need to include every last detail about
the study. The text should be broken up by visuals, smaller paragraphs, and really just the gist of
the study and each exhibit, just enough in order for the reader to understand exactly what it all
entailed.
Illustrations
All of the illustrations within this report include photos of both the exhibits themselves and what
the television used for the interactive videos looks like. They are all in color, and they are
mediocre quality. Some of the photos are great quality: they have well-balanced color, are clear,
and are proportional. However, some of the other photos used, such as the photo of the African
Masks, such as on page four, and the photo of the interactive video screen on page eight, appear
to have bad resolution, and the lighting discolors the photo, giving it an orange tint. While this
does not make what is in the photo unclear, it is not as good of quality as it could be. The bad
quality may be distracting to the reader and make the report lose credibility. If the writers instead
used other, better quality photos or took a new photo on a different camera setting, the MIA
10. Dempsey 10
report would not risk losing any of its credibility for something as trivial as the quality of the
photos.
For the most part, they are easy to see, and are accompanied by captions explaining them more
in-depth. While this is a substantial strength for the report, a few elements should be changed in
order to maximize theirs’ and the whole report’s effectiveness. One element is how they are
placed on the page, relating back to organization. Page four, five, and thirteen have two or three
large illustrations crammed onto one page, while several pages in a row, such as pages 14-21,
have no illustrations and are simply text heavy. While this does not hinder readability, it
certainly does not enhance it. Readers are often going to be attracted to the illustrations; that is
what their eyes will go to first. This is why the illustrations should be re-sized, especially on
pages one, four, and thirteen. One or two should be included on each page in order to break up
the text. This way, the reader will not be overwhelmed by a long report; but rather, they will get
to see the site of the study for themselves.
Another element of the illustrations that can be improved is the captions. While captions are
important to have and give the reader a sense of what the particular illustration is representing,
the captions in this report are too wordy. This is never a good idea, because the reader will not
want to take the time to read the caption and will therefore lose interest more easily. Instead, the
writer should take the bulk of the text out of the caption and add it to the body text, following
phrases such as, “In figure 1, we see that…” Labeling the illustrations in order should still be
done, as well as a short phrase telling the reader what the illustration is of. That is all the captions
should contain; otherwise, the long-winded descriptions should be incorporated into the body
text.
Accessibility
The MIA Interactive Video report is fairly accessible on the webpage and is available to
everybody, but it may be hard to find. It is the “Museum Reports” section under the “About” tab;
but since these two do not have a clear connection, many visitors may not think to look for
reports under that tab. The “about” tab should include a drop-down menu, or an additional tab
could be included to the search bar, under the name “Written Works” or “Museum Reports.”
There are many other reports and agendas in this section, and a clear tab would make it more
accessible and easy to find for visitors and employees alike.
Re-Use
The MIA report can be re-used, but probably only in a few situations. If someone is visiting the
museum for the first time, the document may be useful for them when they are looking for
exhibits to explore and what they entail. However, its availability for re-use is only applicable as
long as the exhibits are on display. It is also available to re-use for future interns or employees at
Cincinnatus who want to learn about what projects the company has done on the past, or if
anyone wants to learn about this particular study or studies done at the museum in general.
11. Dempsey 11
However, this report also seems time-sensitive and is really only relevant for a few years, while
the exhibit is still active, available, and popular for visitors.
Establishing the Objectives
For the most part, the MIA report is informative and professional. The reader can learn a lot from
it, and the descriptions and illustrations working together may even motivate them to visit these
exhibits on their next visit to the museum. What is especially helpful in learning about these
exhibits and what the museum has to offer is testimonial from the participants themselves. That
way, visitors are getting feedback from people with their level of knowledge or experience rather
than a writer or museum employee. Readers tend to trust this approach more, especially if they
do not have a lot of experience exploring art museums.
In order to make the MIA report the most effective, professional, and appealing that it can be for
its reader, a few edits and revisions need to be made. This mostly concerns organization, layout,
and navigation. The organization of the MIA report is mostly effective and allows for easy
navigation. It includes headings and subheadings in order to find specific sections for easily, and
there is a detailed table of contents that successfully separates the various sections. However, the
executive summary is not organized in a very logical matter. It is simply a bulleted list when
executives should and are usually in paragraph format. The executive summary is included to
give a brief description of what is to come in the report and what readers can learn from it.
Instead of bullets, it would be helpful to just use short paragraphs. In addition, the executive
summary should only be one page, not two. Many included bullet points that are not a summary
but a detailed description, such as specific information on the Art of Japan or the African Masks.
This can be removed from the executive summary and added to the body of the report.
In order to make navigation even easier and more interesting, the headings and subheadings
should be more specific. For example, instead of simply saying “Sound,” the writer can say,
“Sounds in the African Mask Video.” That way, readers will know what they are about to learn
about and can find it more easily later on. In addition, photos should be spread out more,
including one or two per page with text wrapped around it. This way, there will be a more
balanced text to illustrations ratio, and people will not get bored with several text-heavy pages in
a row. In addition, most of the information in the captions should be added to the body text so
they do not get too wordy.
Once these changes are made to this report, it will be even more professional, interesting, and
well-organized for readers. It can also serve as a model when another museum report is written
surrounding a new set of exhibits. The number one priority when writing and revising a report
like this is who is reading it; and if they are satisfied, then the writer knows that the revisions are
exactly what it needed.
12. Dempsey 12
Style Guide
Unless used to label a figure number in a photo caption, numbers under ten should be
spelled out. Numbers over ten should be written with their Arabic numbers.
No headings and subheadings need any type of punctuation. They should just have the
heading and nothing else.
All photos should have clear resolution and be restored to their original color.
Unless in quotations, videos should be referred to their exact title. For example, it should
always be “Tea Time” instead of “the tea video.”
Dates of the report and exhibit/video history should all match when mentioned more than
once.
Minneapolis Institute of the Arts should always be referred to as “MIA” except for when
it is first mentioned at the beginning of the report.
