Saturday, 21 August 2004 02:44 pm
No local hero...so far
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
deckardcanineThursday, 19 August 2004 (as ASM style requires me to write it), marked the completion of my first month working for ASM. My supervisor asked me to meet that morning for my "1-month anniversary" (mensiversary?), so I did. It was less an evaluation than a warning of what they expected in the coming months, like a speed of 45 pages a week by month 2 while my current mean is a reasonable 30.7. Still, my mind was more on the evaluation portions.
It's hard to say how I'm doing for a copy editor trainee. When Brendan, the earliest trainee to get started this summer (perhaps due to his significantly greater age of 33), got a positive evaluation, he figured that I and my age-mate Mike were doing even better, but neither of us figured so. Obviously we are in no position to compare ourselves, at least not at this point. As it is, the feedback directed to me is very mixed. I often receive margin notes saying "Good" or even "Excellent," but I also get the dreaded "See me." My supervisor brought up two big mistakes in particular: a difficult paper I neglected to give two reads (she called it haste, I called it habit), and a figure-editing test I didn't take seriously until it was returned.
Probably my biggest flaw has been cockiness, which is reportedly more common among trainees who used to hold other editing jobs. It explains why I'd been moving too fast, not asking enough questions, not checking my instructional sheets often enough, and not reading the handbook enough when I had time (altho the tedium of rereading definitely had a part in that). My previous job, which didn't deal much with publications, didn't have as many editors or the same high demands of editors and therefore was more likely to treat me as a star employee. Here I have to keep in mind that I am not even near the end of my training, and for the very good reason that ASM has a style manual and process all its own. I'm being given relatively short papers for relatively simple journals. The full-fledged CEs get to work on 10, but I'm barely given 4.
But while these problems were somewhat predictable, I had even been falling down on the task on which I'd prided myself most: using sharp eyes. Not only would I miss some blatant errors on the first two reads, but when I looked at the CE's hardcopy marks -- or even my own -- and had to make changes electronically, I would often overlook those. Nothing like professional feedback on that to remind me that I'm no proofing demigod.
Now the good news: these problems are by and large things of the past now. I take more caution than ever before, and this does not appear to result in a longer time getting papers ready for publication. A yellow highlighter ensures that I don't miss hardcopy marks. Conducive habits are setting in. This improvement has not escaped my supervisor's notice. I have high hopes for the next month.
And FWIW, the work scene is also improving for me socially. Brendan may be half again my age and married, but that creates no barriers; he and Mike are about equally close to me. Sharing an office has its benefits.
It's hard to say how I'm doing for a copy editor trainee. When Brendan, the earliest trainee to get started this summer (perhaps due to his significantly greater age of 33), got a positive evaluation, he figured that I and my age-mate Mike were doing even better, but neither of us figured so. Obviously we are in no position to compare ourselves, at least not at this point. As it is, the feedback directed to me is very mixed. I often receive margin notes saying "Good" or even "Excellent," but I also get the dreaded "See me." My supervisor brought up two big mistakes in particular: a difficult paper I neglected to give two reads (she called it haste, I called it habit), and a figure-editing test I didn't take seriously until it was returned.
Probably my biggest flaw has been cockiness, which is reportedly more common among trainees who used to hold other editing jobs. It explains why I'd been moving too fast, not asking enough questions, not checking my instructional sheets often enough, and not reading the handbook enough when I had time (altho the tedium of rereading definitely had a part in that). My previous job, which didn't deal much with publications, didn't have as many editors or the same high demands of editors and therefore was more likely to treat me as a star employee. Here I have to keep in mind that I am not even near the end of my training, and for the very good reason that ASM has a style manual and process all its own. I'm being given relatively short papers for relatively simple journals. The full-fledged CEs get to work on 10, but I'm barely given 4.
But while these problems were somewhat predictable, I had even been falling down on the task on which I'd prided myself most: using sharp eyes. Not only would I miss some blatant errors on the first two reads, but when I looked at the CE's hardcopy marks -- or even my own -- and had to make changes electronically, I would often overlook those. Nothing like professional feedback on that to remind me that I'm no proofing demigod.
Now the good news: these problems are by and large things of the past now. I take more caution than ever before, and this does not appear to result in a longer time getting papers ready for publication. A yellow highlighter ensures that I don't miss hardcopy marks. Conducive habits are setting in. This improvement has not escaped my supervisor's notice. I have high hopes for the next month.
And FWIW, the work scene is also improving for me socially. Brendan may be half again my age and married, but that creates no barriers; he and Mike are about equally close to me. Sharing an office has its benefits.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject