Teaching Public Health Writing Jennifer

Beard
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/teaching-public-health-writing-jennifer-beard/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Essentials of Public Health (Essential Public Health)

3rd Edition, (Ebook PDF)

https://ebookmass.com/product/essentials-of-public-health-
essential-public-health-3rd-edition-ebook-pdf/

HANDBOOK OF TEACHING PUBLIC POLICY Emily St.Denny

https://ebookmass.com/product/handbook-of-teaching-public-policy-
emily-st-denny/

Introduction to Public Health

https://ebookmass.com/product/introduction-to-public-health/

Legal Research, Analysis, and Writing William H. Putman

& Jennifer Albright

https://ebookmass.com/product/legal-research-analysis-and-
writing-william-h-putman-jennifer-albright/
Teaching Todayu2019s Health 10th Edition, (Ebook PDF)

https://ebookmass.com/product/teaching-todays-health-10th-
edition-ebook-pdf/

Essentials of Health Behavior (Essential Public Health)

2nd Edition

https://ebookmass.com/product/essentials-of-health-behavior-
essential-public-health-2nd-edition/

Essentials of Health Economics (Essential Public

Health) 2nd Edition

https://ebookmass.com/product/essentials-of-health-economics-
essential-public-health-2nd-edition/

Essentials of Public Health Preparedness and Emergency

Management (Essential Public Health) 2nd Edition,
(Ebook PDF)

https://ebookmass.com/product/essentials-of-public-health-
preparedness-and-emergency-management-essential-public-
health-2nd-edition-ebook-pdf/

Essentials of Management and Leadership in Public

Health (Essential Public Health) 1st Edition, (Ebook
PDF)

https://ebookmass.com/product/essentials-of-management-and-
leadership-in-public-health-essential-public-health-1st-edition-
ebook-pdf/
T E A C H I N G P U B L I C H E A LT H W R I T I N G
 TEACHING PUBLIC HEALTH
Teaching Public Health offers instructors state-​of-​the-​science tools and resources to support inte-
gration of new topics and pedagogical strategies that can promote active, engaged, and innovative
learning in academic public health.

Series Editors
LISA SULLIVAN, Boston University School of Public Health
SANDRO GALEA, Boston University School of Public Health

Teaching public health writing

Jennifer Beard
TEACHING PUBLIC
HEALTH WRITING

Jennifer Beard
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers
the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education
by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University
Press in the UK and certain other countries.

Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press

198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America.

© Oxford University Press 2022

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in

a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction
rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above.

You must not circulate this work in any other form

and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Beard, Jennifer, PhD, author.
Title: Teaching public health writing / Jennifer Beard.
Description: New York, NY : Oxford University Press, [2022] |
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2022014936 (print) | LCCN 2022014937 (ebook) |
ISBN 9780197576465 (paperback) | ISBN 9780197576489 (epub) |
ISBN 9780197576496
Subjects: MESH: Writing | Public Health—education | Students, Public Health
Classification: LCC R119 (print) | LCC R119 (ebook) | NLM WA 18 |
DDC 808.06/661—dc23/eng/20220412
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022014936
LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022014937

DOI: 10.1093/​oso/​9780197576465.001.0001

This material is not intended to be, and should not be considered, a substitute for medical or other
professional advice. Treatment for the conditions described in this material is highly dependent on
the individual circumstances. And, while this material is designed to offer accurate information with
respect to the subject matter covered and to be current as of the time it was written, research and
knowledge about medical and health issues is constantly evolving and dose schedules for medications
are being revised continually, with new side effects recognized and accounted for regularly. Readers
must therefore always check the product information and clinical procedures with the most up-​to-​date
published product information and data sheets provided by the manufacturers and the most recent
codes of conduct and safety regulation. The publisher and the authors make no representations or
warranties to readers, express or implied, as to the accuracy or completeness of this material. Without
limiting the foregoing, the publisher and the authors make no representations or warranties as to the
accuracy or efficacy of the drug dosages mentioned in the material. The authors and the publisher do
not accept, and expressly disclaim, any responsibility for any liability, loss, or risk that may be claimed
or incurred as a consequence of the use and/​or application of any of the contents of this material.

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Printed by Marquis, Canada
 Zoe Beard and Kristine Black, We’re Still Here
Irene Beard, Jack Beard, and John Beard, In Memory
CONTENTS

Series Foreword  ix
Preface  xi
Acknowledgments  xiii
Introduction  xv

PART 1: THEORY AND PRACTICAL STRATEGIES

CHAPTER 1. Writing Across the Life Course  3
CHAPTER 2. When You Can’t Remove the Pump Handle,
Reduce Harm  22
CHAPTER 3. Designing Writing Assignments for Public Health
Classes  40
CHAPTER 4. Assessment Involves Much More Than Assigning a
Grade  69

PART 2: ANTHOLOGY OF WRITING ASSIGNMENTS

CHAPTER 5. Examples of Public Health Writing Assignments  93

Epilogue  139
Works Cited  141

vii
SERIES FOREWORD

Academic public health has been growing substantially over the past
two decades. There are increasingly more accredited schools and pro-
grams of public health, and more standalone baccalaureate programs.
Teaching in academic public health similarly continues to grow at both
the undergraduate and graduate levels, with more faculty engaged in
public health education, research, and practice.
Coincident with this growth in interest in the field, established grad-
uate schools and programs of public health are redesigning curricula to
meet the changing needs of incoming students and to ensure that grad-
uates have the knowledge, skills, and attributes to meet the needs of a
changing workforce. A cornerstone of these revised curricula, in line
with evolving accreditation standards set by the Council on Education
for Public Health, is integrating knowledge across disciplines to teach
students that the foundations of public health do not exist in disciplin-
ary silos but rather need to be addressed at the interstices of disciplines.
However, teaching public health across disciplines can present chal-
lenges for instructors, many of whom are new and bring different areas
of expertise to public health. It often requires using different books with
insights from across disciplines and finding ways to integrate material
that is not being integrated in any one book. In addition, the material
across integrative areas of study evolves quickly, making it difficult, if
not impossible, for one definitive textbook to cover all that needs to be
covered across several integrative courses.
Recognizing both the potential in burgeoning public health train-
ing and the challenges and opportunities presented by more integra-
tive learning, we offer Teaching Public Health: An Integrated Approach, a

ix
x S eries Foreword

series of primers for faculty teaching public health or for professionals

to learn essential concepts.
The series will provide instructors with tools and techniques to
meet educational trends including online and other more flexible
teaching and learning modalities, design of stackable credentials build-
ing to degrees, on-​demand learning, competency-​based education,
project-​based and practice-​based teaching, more inclusive and equi-
table teaching practices, effective use of educational technology, and
technology-​enabled learning.
It is our hope that this series will be a practical and valuable resource
for new and experienced public health educators to support integration
of new and exciting topics and approaches into their teaching.

—​Lisa Sullivan and Sandro Galea

P R E FA C E

I’ve been writing this book since 2003, in my head, in the comments
I make on student papers, in conversations with colleagues, in the writ-
ing workshops and conversations we have in the Boston University
School of Public Health, and in short occasional articles. And I have
been writing it as I drafted and revised my own policy briefs, literature
reviews, proposals, countless emails, and writing assignment instruc-
tions. In 2020, I started typing, pulling it together into a single narrative
that starts with my own rocky writing experience as a master’s of public
health (MPH) student.
I see this book as a call to action. Schools and programs of public
health need to invest in supporting and mentoring writers at all levels.
This starts with recognizing that we cannot expect our students to come
to us already knowing how to write clear, persuasive, succinct public
health documents. Once we’ve accepted the reality that students need
practice, a lot of feedback, and opportunities to revise, our institutions
need to invest in the human resources needed to provide this critical
intellectual labor. And we shouldn’t stop with supporting student writ-
ers. Our academic institutions are filled with writers. Indeed, writing
is a primary job requirement of all faculty and many staff members. As
a professor, I can say with certainty that little about my daily working
life supports my ability to write anything more substantive than hun-
dreds of emails each week. Yet I am expected to publish every year. We
can build a culture that supports individual writers by promoting daily
writing (if only for fifteen minutes), demystifying the publication pro-
cess, and supporting public scholarship.

xi
xii P reface

This cultural shift starts with the conversations we have with our
students about writing. Are we talking in our classes about the writing
process, identifying and speaking to an audience, and the conventions
of writing different types of public health documents? Or are we simply
assigning papers, wringing our hands over flawed drafts, and leaving it
at that? My hope is that this book will help all of us start conversations
about writing, mentoring, practice, and process in our classes, in our
departments, and within public health schools and programs.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I learned how to become a better public health writer from my col-

leagues and students. I began my journey as a writing teacher during
my time as a graduate student in the English departments at Ohio
University and then the University of New Hampshire. My official title
was Teaching Assistant, but I was a fledgling professor with my own
classes of undergraduate writers. That was a long time ago, 1989 to
1994 or so, but the lessons I learned from my mentors, Betty Pytlik and
Tom Newkirk, and my fellow composition instructors have stayed with
me. Betty and Tom may be surprised to hear this as we have fallen out
of touch and I eventually stopped teaching composition and English
literature and moved toward public health. The lessons I learned from
them—​about the writing process, meeting student writers where they
are, training students to provide feedback to one another, and always
providing opportunities to revise—​have formed the foundation of my
own approach to mentoring student writers and all other aspects of
teaching.
With gratitude to Joe Lugalla for nudging me toward public health,
to Rich Feeley for teaching me everything I know about clear and
concise public health writing, to Jonathan Simon for taking a chance
on hiring me to teach writing to global health students, to Patricia
Hibberd for being a supportive chair and mentor, to Anne Donohue
and Elizabeth Mehren for our ongoing arguments about the differences
between a story and a topic, to Rich Furman for coaching me through
the process of writing this manuscript. To Sandro Galea, Lisa Sullivan,
Emelia Benjamin, and Michael Stein for building a writing culture and
community at the Boston University School of Public Health And the

xiii
xiv A cknowledgments

energetic and creative team of people who developed and are con-
tinually building our Public Health Writing and Peer Writing Coach
Programs: Vanessa Edouard, Amanda Velez, Mary Murphy Phillips,
Rea Shqepa, Ryann Monteiro, Mahogany Price, and Colbey Ricklefs.
To our eleven generations of peer writing coaches, and to my colleagues
who shared their writing assignments: Shannon Latkin Anderson,
Ann Aschengrau, Bram Brooks, Rich Furman, Wayne LaMorte, Bruce
Larson, Lisa Messersmith, Peter Rockers, Lora Sabin, Mike Siegel, and
Taryn Vian. Thank you.
INTRODUCTION

Writing is public health. It is what makes public health public. It is

the way that we in public health convey our messages, policies, and
practices, and it is the way that we prompt action.
Laura Magaña Valladares, Richard K. Riegelman, and Susan Albertine,
“Writing in Public Health: A New Program from the Association of
Schools and Programs of Public Health” (2019)

What Is Public Health Writing?

Charles-​Edward Amory Winslow defined public health as “the science
and art of preventing disease, prolonging life, and promoting physical
and mental health and efficiency through organized community efforts”
(Winslow 1920, p. 30). Following Winslow’s lead, Healthy People 2010
defined health communication as the “art and technique of informing,
influencing, and motivating individual, institutional, and public audi-
ences about important health issues” (U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services).
Of all the definitions of public health and health communication,
I find these to be the most useful when talking about the writing we
do as public health researchers and professionals because of the equal
emphasis on science and art. Art, in this context, urges writers to give
thoughtful consideration to clarity, style, and voice. And it creates space
for evolution of our information and ideas, the audiences for whom we
are writing, the types of writing, and the modes of dissemination that
will achieve our purpose. Purpose is a key word here.

Teaching Public Health Writing. Jennifer Beard, Oxford University Press. © Oxford University Press 2022.
DOI: 10.1093/​oso/​9780197576465.001.0001
xvi I ntroduction

Public health writers aim to educate and create change by inform-

ing, influencing, and motivating action. Jay Bernhardt describes health
communication as “inherently interventionist, seeking to promote and
protect health through change at all levels of influence” (Bernhardt
2004, p. 2052). Writing (the confluence of words, sentences, para-
graphs, semantics, syntax, and voice) is the foundation of this commu-
nication and action. And writing well to educate, inform, and convince
is an art that we develop over years of experience and practice.
Of course, the purpose-​driven, functional science and technical
writing we do as public health professionals often does not feel like
art—​not at all. But we are at our best when we strive to balance our
science with creative expression, through thoughtful choices about lan-
guage, sentence, paragraph length, and other ways to make reading our
work easier and more pleasurable. I say “at our best” because it’s easy to
get so caught up in dense thickets of numbers, technical language, and
abbreviations that we forget both our readers and our purpose.
Many of us are prone to this tilt toward writing highly technical prose
packed with information and analysis. But experienced writers, their
mentors, and editors understand the need to balance accurate explana-
tions of evidence with clarity. They ask: Who is reading? Why are they
reading? What will they do with the information? The answers then guide
our language choices, sentence and paragraph length, and much more.
We hone these reading, writing, and editorial skills over the course
of our careers, through constant practice, collaboration, feedback from
peers and reviewers, rejection of manuscripts, and revision fueled by
optimism and humility (optimism that we might get it right this time,
or at least closer to what we want to say, and humble acceptance that
there is always room for improvement).
We do our best to pass this ethos to our students, through the writ-
ing projects we assign and the feedback we provide. But we also get
frustrated when the writing they turn in is wordy, vague, overly techni-
cal, disorganized—​you name it. Sometimes this frustration turns into
a stronger sense of grievance and despair because we assume students
should come to us already knowing how to write, and we do not feel
equipped to teach writing in our epidemiology, health policy, and
behavioral science courses.
 I ntroduction xvii

In the last few years, the Association of Schools and Programs of

Public Health (ASPPH) has started a much-​needed conversation about
student writing that includes a new “Writing for Public Health” section
of the journal Public Health Reports. The articles published there have
been an important venue for sharing strategies for mentoring student
writers in public health graduate and undergraduate programs. They
also convey frustration. The title of a 2019 Public Health Reports arti-
cle by Tom Lang says it all: “Who Me? Ideas for Faculty Who Never
Expected to Be Teaching Public Health Students to Write” (Lang
2019). And his introductory paragraph does not spark optimism:

Ample evidence confirms that college graduates in general are not

good writers, and there is no reason to believe that graduates of pub-
lic health programs are any different. Although most students learn
the basics, only about 30% can create prose that is “precise, engag-
ing, and coherent.” (Lang 2019, p. 206)

Is the Writing of Public Health Students Getting

Worse?
I hear this question a lot. Sometimes it is a direct and unequivocal
statement—​student writing is worse than ever before. Many professors
teaching public health at the graduate level agree. A survey conducted
by ASPPH in 2018 found that 86% of respondents (representing 61
schools and programs) responded “yes” to the question “In your best
judgment, is there a perception at your school/​program that there is
a problem with the state or quality of public health graduate student
writing?” (Association of Schools & Programs of Public Health 2018).
The wording of the question is tricky because it is asking respon-
dents if they have heard the grumbling of their colleagues about the
quality of student writing. I responded to this survey and I was one of
the people who answered “yes” because I hear the frequent laments.
But my response to the unasked, more direct, and difficult-​to-​measure
question (“Is there a problem with the state or quality of public health
graduate student writing”) is quite different.
xviii I ntroduction

No, student writing is not getting worse. Many students struggle to

adapt what they know about writing style, voice, and organization to
the expectations of public health readers. Our role is to bear witness to
the stressors of this transition and mentor students through it. Some
sail, but most blunder. I was one of the latter.
I was one of those master’s in public health (MPH) students who
you might expect to have no problem with class writing assignments.
I had a PhD in English literature. I studied composition at the University
of New Hampshire, where Don Murray, Tom Newkirk, and other lumi-
naries had forged the writing process movement. I taught undergraduate
composition and literature classes for years. I had worked as a freelance
editor. I expected my writing experiences and knowledge about the
composition process to translate easily in my public health classes.
My hubris astonishes me now. I had no idea what kind of writing
I would be asked to do. And I wasn’t particularly interested in the differ-
ences between what my professors were asking for and what I planned
to write. It never occurred to me that there would be differences.
When I received instructions for writing assignments that first
semester I gave them a cursory glance, tucked them away in a folder,
and promptly forgot about them. Then I turned in work that looked
a lot like the critical analysis papers I was used to writing about
Victorian novels. My professors’ dismay was clear. “This is well writ-
ten, but . . . ” was a common refrain. (They were being kind. I knew
how to turn a phrase, and a lot of clever language was all those papers
amounted to.) In return, I was disappointed that they did not appre-
ciate my style and voice as much as they noted all they ways in which
I had not followed the instructions. The usual cascade of emotions
followed: indignation, defensiveness, humble acceptance, determi-
nation to do better next time, and fear that I wouldn’t be able to.
Every semester of my MPH brought small shocks to what I thought
I knew about writing. These upsets and recoveries taught me important
lessons about the ways in which writing for my public health classes dif-
fered from the academic writing I had been doing.
Many of our students face a similar challenge. They have learned
to write well or at least competently for their political science, English,
biology, or social work majors. They have written undergraduate theses
in anthropology and international relations, and some have even been
 I ntroduction xix

co-​authors on publications in peer-​reviewed journals. They expect their

experiences and successes to translate automatically to the writing they
will do as public health graduate students.
Their professors expect this too. And when student writing falls
short, we are as disheartened as the author and unsure about what to
do next. If we only give critical feedback, students can feel lost. Some
embrace the new challenge readily, but others feel hurt, even betrayed.
How many times have you had a variation on a conversation that began
with one of the following sentences: “Why haven’t I ever had a problem
before?” “Why did my other professors like my writing?” “Why don’t
YOU like my writing?”
No surprise, we feel frustrated during these conversations and our
hours of solitary reading. Sometimes we look over our shoulders and shift
the heavy sense of personal responsibility to faceless high school teach-
ers, freshman composition instructors, and other undergraduate profes-
sors when our students’ writing doesn’t meet our expectations. Do any of
the laments in Box I.1 sound familiar (either as silent thoughts you have
while reading papers or from heated conversations in faculty meetings)?

Shifting the Conversation

Our focus on the writing failures and successes of individual students
is part of the problem, as is the pressure felt by individual professors
to guide students whose writing is particularly challenging. One of my
goals in writing this book is to shift the conversation from individual
shortcomings and responsibility to a population-​based perspective.
The social-​ecological model (Figure I.1) that many of us use in our
classes and research to break down messy, complex problems can help
us rethink the place of writing and mentoring within our public health
schools and programs.
Instead of blaming students, their previous teachers, and ourselves
for not being able to fix the problems we see in our students’ writing,
we need to be thinking about why we assign writing to our public health
students, what their common questions and challenges are, what we
want them to learn through the writing process, and how we can help
them build their skills. As Maja Wilson says in her book Rethinking
Rubrics in Writing Assessment, “We should never assume that student
BOX I.1 Frustrated Public Health Professors Lament
Flawed Student Writing

• “The writing my students turn in gets worse each year. How

did they get into graduate school?” Subtext: Someone didn’t do
their job or has settled for mediocrity. Our standards are slipping.
• “I had four hours to grade papers and only got three done
because I ended up rewriting big chunks of each. That’s how
bad they were.” Subtext: If I don’t do this, how will they know
that their writing is bad? I’m starting to feel like I’m the only person
who cares about this.
• “Can you believe that Student X told me she has never had
trouble with her writing in the past? How did she get this far?”
Subtext: Someone wasn’t doing their job.
• “Why didn’t they learn this in high school or when they were
undergraduates?” Subtext: Someone wasn’t doing their job. Once
you learn how to do it, writing comes as naturally as breathing.
Students don’t care about their writing.
• “I need to stop assigning papers to my students and give exams
instead. The papers are painful to read and take far more time
to grade than I can afford to give.” Subtext: Helping students
become better writers is not my job. I’m here to teach them impor-
tant things like how to use a 2 × 2 table, calculate a disability-​
adjusted life-​year, recognize bias in a study design, understand the
strengths and weaknesses of national health insurance in Ghana,
analyze the state-​level implementation of the Affordable Care Act,
(fill in example relevant to your discipline).
• “My students are plagiarizing left and right. They don’t know
how to quote, paraphrase, or cite sources appropriately.”
Subtext: Someone wasn’t doing their job. Students are trying to get
away with something.
• “I always spend hours commenting on student papers, but
I have to stop doing that. I don’t think any of the students read
them so what’s the point?” Subtext: Students don’t care about
their writing.
 Support/Implement:
• Policy articulating
institutional support for
building a community of
writers.
Talk about: • Faculty time to provide
• Assignment objectives feedback on drafts and
• Audience Institutional Support meet with students.
• Writing process for Writing • Training for teaching
• Deliberate practice Resources assistants and peer
coaches to provide
• Multi-draft process
feedback on student
• Incorporating feedback Community &
writing
• Revision Classroom
Conversations • Community workshops
about Writing & writing groups

Mentor:
Interpersonal
• Professors mentor
Mentoring
students
• Students mentor each
other
Support all writers: • Professors mentor each
Individual other
• Students Writers
• Professors mentor staff
• Professors
• Staff mentor staff
• Staff

FIGURE I.1 Applying the Social-​Ecological Model to Building a Writing Community

xxii I ntroduction

papers will be perfect; our job is to help students realize what they can-
not yet do. This involves a subtle but important shift in our view of the
texts they create” (Wilson 2006, p. 30).
Wilson is talking about high school students, but her appeal applies
equally to our graduate and undergraduate public health students. And
it reinforces the questions I just asked, about our objectives for assigning
writing in our classes. When we assign a policy brief, are we testing stu-
dents’ knowledge of the genre and its conventions? Or is our goal to give
our students practice with a type of writing they have never done before
and may frequently be asked to do as public health professionals? I’m
guessing the latter. We may even have it written in our syllabus as a learn-
ing objective: “After this course, students will be able to communicate
technical information in a way that will be useful to policymakers as they
make decisions about public health interventions.” If we are employing
writing as a means and an outcome of learning, we are all writing mentors.
Part of this shift in understanding how best to help our students
become better writers entails an inclusive analysis of who needs
mentoring. Students for whom writing is their second, third, or
fourth language and native language writers who stumble over their
own words in every sentence are not alone. All writers benefit from
mentoring.
Becoming a better writer is a life-​long endeavor, a continuum of
knowledge, training, and practice. We are all on this continuum of writ-
ing ability, which ranges from incomprehensible to glorious, most of us
muddling about in the middle. When I say all I am referring to students,
staff, faculty, deans, even the famous writers in our midst. Everyone.
A multilevel approach to mentoring can help us manage expectations
at the individual, interpersonal, community, and institutional level and
build the case for investing in writing resources for all members of pub-
lic health schools and programs.
Our public health schools and programs are writing communi-
ties, whether we think about them that way or not. Ongoing, open
conversations informed by composition and cognitive development
research and theory can help all of us build our own writing prac-
tice and shift the way we approach student writing. But talking alone
will not change the situation, especially if the only people having the
 I ntroduction xxiii

conversation are frustrated professors facing mountains of imperfect

student writing.
Locally, deans, associate deans, and chairs need to be drawn into the
conversation. And more broadly, we also need to engage the Council
on Education for Public Health, and the American Public Health
Association. And we need to participate in the ongoing discussion of
student writing started by ASPPH.

A Call to Patience, Practice, and Process

A student-​centered, more inclusive, strengths-​based approach to men-
toring student writers in our public health programs meets students
where they are. It provides them with the encouragement, opportuni-
ties, and resources to develop their confidence, voice, and an under-
standing that all writing is an iterative process (Beard et al. 2020).
While important for both undergraduate and graduate students study-
ing public health, a strengths-​based approach to writing is particularly
needed in master’s and doctoral programs. In graduate programs the
curriculum and academic resources are often designed with the expec-
tation that students arrive able to write clear, concise, evidence-​based
documents. We assume students will readily adapt their skills and
knowledge to new genres and audiences.
When I started my MPH program, I embarked on a steep learning
curve to adapt my writing style and my understanding of the objective
of the writing I was doing. Like me, our graduate students come from
many professional, disciplinary, and cultural backgrounds. We cannot
assume they all have the same academic and professional writing expe-
rience. A strengths-​based approach to helping them build their writing
practice and skill demonstrates our discipline’s core commitment to
social justice and eliminating inequity.
We can better meet the needs of our students while they are in our
programs and as they move into the professional world by doing the
following.

Changing the Question

Instead of asking if student writing is getting worse and why, we can shift
our focus away from frustration. The more useful questions are: What
xxiv I ntroduction

we are asking our students to do when we give them a writing assign-

ment? And how can we best help them to succeed?

Approaching Writing Challenges with Theory and Evidence

About the Source of Struggle and the Learning Process
We often talk about writing as a skill and a competency, but neither
word explains the cognitive and creative alchemy that occurs between
the author’s brain and the words she puts on the page. Writing is a
practice and a process. We write our clearest and most concise prose
and meet the needs of our readers (three of the key hallmarks of pub-
lic health writing) when we take our writing through multiple drafts.
In each iteration we are engaging in deliberate practice—​honing our
language, evidence, and arguments in response to feedback from
others.

Encouraging a Life-​Course Approach

Writing is a craft that we develop over our lifetimes. We are all (stu-
dents, staff, professors, and alumni) on a continuum of writing experi-
ence, and our places are constantly shifting depending on where we are
in the process of a writing project and what we are writing. (Is it a topic
we know well and a familiar genre? Or are we exploring new ideas and
writing for a new audience and purpose?)

Calling on Schools and Programs of Public Health to Invest

in Student, Staff, and Faculty Writing
This can entail hiring and training students to provide feedback to their
peers; designing training for faculty that focuses on designing clear,
detailed writing assignments; and giving written and oral feedback.

Facilitating Conversations at All Levels of Our Academic

Community About the Objectives of Writing Assignments
in Public Health Classrooms
We can start simply by taking time in class to talk to students about
writing assignments. If we assign policy briefs, literature reviews,
funding proposals, or other types of practical documents we can
explain to students that they are learning new genres they may be
 I ntroduction xxv

called upon to write as public health professionals. From there we

can talk about how these assignments may differ from the type of
writing they did as undergraduates in majors that range from biol-
ogy to art history. We can remind them to start early, write multiple
drafts, seek feedback, and revise. They have likely heard this advice
before, but it may not occur to them that the strategies they learned
as undergraduates still apply in graduate school. We can explain the
goals of the assignment and share strategies for organization, voice,
appropriate language, etc.
If we all take time to talk in class about the writing we assign, stu-
dents will absorb our collective belief that writing is a critical skill in
every area of public health (as important as epidemiology or biostatis-
tics); that it is often challenging to all of us (they are not alone); and
that it is worthy of the time and effort it demands. And they may begin
to ask questions, publicly—​questions that other students also have but
may be embarrassed to ask.
Just as importantly, we can organize community conversations in
which professors talk about their own writing, their process, their chal-
lenges, and strategies that have worked for them over the years.

How to Use This Book

The chapters in Part 1 combine my experience as a writing teacher and
MPH student, composition theory, and public health approaches to
analyze the complex experiences professors often run into when men-
toring student writers. Each chapter walks through the process of men-
toring our student writers. Chapter 1 dissects the problem of our own
expectations. Chapter 2 offers concrete ways to approach mentoring
student writers. Chapter 3 offers guidance on designing writing assign-
ments. And Chapter 4 makes the case for approaching assessment as a
critical moment in the writing process and, as such, a continuation of
mentoring.
Part 2 offers numerous examples of writing assignments and assess-
ment tools used in public health classrooms.
In other words, Part 1 offers my approach and Part 2 branches out
to embrace the many ways we employ writing in our public health
xxvi I ntroduction

classrooms. Use what works for you, adapt it to fit your own vision, and
keep experimenting to find the approach you find most useful.

Part 1: Theory and Practical Strategies

Chapter 1: Writing Across the Life Course
Chapter 1 makes the case that we cannot expect our students to know
how to write when they get to our classes. I describe my own experi-
ence as an MPH student learning how to adapt almost every aspect of
my abstract, humanities writing style to the practical needs of public
health communication. I apply the life-​course approach and a detailed
multilevel analysis to think through ways we can better meet the needs
of student writers in our public health schools and programs. I then
blend public health approaches with composition theory to argue that
those of us teaching public health students (particularly graduate stu-
dents) cannot assume they come to us knowing how to do the type of
writing we expect of them. I start with the life course. Then I move into
linguistic theory about cognitive development as it applies to writing
process and practice.
Using the social-​ecological model, I make the case that responsi-
bility for helping students improve their writing cannot fall only on
individual professors and students. We need to rethink the place of
writing within our curriculum and provide resources and venues to
facilitate conversations about writing process and practice in class-
rooms and community events within our institutions. At the societal/​
institutional level, our schools and programs need to invest in faculty
time for mentoring student writers and resources that help students
understand the writing process and develop a deliberate writing prac-
tice. We also need to think carefully about whether or not our cur-
rent competency-​based approach is sufficient for mentoring student
writers.

Chapter 2: When You Can’t Remove the Pump Handle, Reduce Harm
In Chapter 2, I propose a harm reduction approach to mentoring stu-
dent writers. Prevention is central to all that we do in public health,
but preventing unclear, wordy, vague, imprecise writing is impossible.
We all write garbled, ill-​conceived sentences, paragraphs, pages, and
 I ntroduction xxvii

documents. Getting our thoughts down, even incoherently, is step

one of the writing process. Polished, clearly written, engaging prose
of any type takes time, revision, feedback, and more revision. Even a
well-​crafted, easy-​to-​read email takes time and revision. We may not
seek feedback on something as prosaic as an email, but I often do when
I want to be sure I am expressing myself as clearly as possible. And I’ve
certainly had occasions when I regretted not taking more care or asking
someone to review before pressing “send.”
The writing process is messy and frustrating. It can also be deeply satisfy-
ing. A harm reduction approach meets student writers where they are and
offers an array of small strategies and tools they can use to make incremental,
deliberate improvements to everything they write. I adapt harm reduction
principles to a detailed example of mentoring a student who has submitted a
paper rife with problems. I then offer concrete strategies for helping students
revise their work (punch lists, peer review, the paramedic method of self-​
editing) as they take their papers through a multi-​draft process.

Chapter 3: Designing Writing Assignments for Public Health Classes

Chapter 3 focuses on readers, purpose, and the many different types of
writing we do in public health. Because our students are doing so much at
once when they write for our classes we need to give them clear instruc-
tions about audience, purpose, and genre. I provide a detailed breakdown
of the types of writing public health professionals do and core compo-
nents of a writing assignment. Are we asking students to mimic the writ-
ing they may do in their careers? If so, we cannot assume they will know
what a determinants analysis is, let alone how to write one. For all of these
reasons, we need to build a multi-​draft process into our assignments.

Chapter 4: Assessment Involves Much More Than Assigning a Grade

Chapter 4 starts with a brief overview of the voluminous and long-​
standing discussion among assessment and composition experts about
what we are doing when we assess writing. What (if anything) are we
objectively measuring? Is it possible to remove subjectivity from the
process? In what ways are rubrics useful and what are their limitations?
I prefer checklists over rubrics and find that they are most useful when
used as a complement to detail-​oriented feedback on papers. I provide
xxviii I ntroduction

an example of the checklist I use. I also comment briefly on grades,

plagiarism, and the pros and cons of authenticity screening tools like
Turnitin.

Part 2: Anthology of Writing Assignments

Developing a good writing assignment takes a considerable amount
of creativity, time, and attention to detail. Each semester I refine and
refresh instructions for the papers I assign, and I am always looking for
good ideas. The writing assignments anthologized in Chapter 5 were
developed by colleagues who generously agreed to share them here.
They include instructions for writing different types of public health
documents (literature reviews, case studies, concept notes, research
proposals, framing memos, and more). I have also included assign-
ments designed to provide students with an opportunity to practice
specific skills, including writing summaries, synthesizing data, and
thinking critically.
I hope you will borrow from, adapt, and build on these examples.
I would love to see what you come up with. As we start the conversation
about mentoring student writers on our campuses, let’s get together
and build a larger, more inclusive archive that we can all turn to for
inspiration.
 PA RT 1

T HE ORY AND P RA CT I C A L
STRATE GIE S
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 Käy kutsumassa, Nappula.

(Nappula menee.)

KINNARI

Kokki onkin melko mestari laulamaan; kun sattuu, niin hän on

paras koko laivassa.

PUOSU

Ihan varmaan.

KOKKI (Tulee Nappulan seurassa hyvästi hutikassa.)

Päivää pojat! Hik, hik.

KINNARI

Mikäs kokkia vaivaa?

SOINI

Kunhan ei vain liene hutikassa?

KOKKI

Itse olet humalassa, senkin pihik, pikihousu! Minä en ole koskaan

nauttinut, hik, mitään karvasta.

PUOSU
 Kunhan ei vain olisi päässyt minun viskypullolleni, kun en arvannut
sitä kätkeä?

KOKKI

Suusi kiinni, mokoma puoshaka, tai annan leukaasi, hik-hik! Kaikki

ne tässä suutaan hikruukaavatkin.

TOISET (Nauravat ja rähisevät.)

KOKKI

Naurakaa nyt, hik, jos haluttaa. (Ottaa Arvia kaulasta, ja puhuu

hänen korvaansa muka hiljaa, vaikka se kuuluu hyvin.) Sinä olet
ainoa oikea mies koko laivassa, kaikki muut ovat, hik, roistoja. —
Minä söin rusinasoppaa ja se teki niin mukavan elämän hik!
(Nauraa.)

KINNARI

Voi riivatun raapattu, nyt meni minulta punta! (Puosulle.) Miten

sinä sait sen juotetuksi?

PUOSU

Kokki on kai saanut sitä makeata viinaa. Vie, Arvi, kokki nukkumaan
ja tule pian takaisin.

KOKKI

Älä komenteeraa, senkin rankkitynnyri, minä menen itse, kun

haluan.
Hik, hyvästi pojat! Hik hik!

KAIKKI (Nauravat ja huutavat kokille hyvästiä. Puosu ja Kinnari

lyövät kättä.)

PUOSU

Ja vetosumma nautitaan yhdessä koko sakki, kun kotikaupunkiin

päästään.

KINNARI

Oli, meni! Kenenkä vuoro nyt on laulaa —

PUOSU

Taitaa olla Soinin.

SOINI

Puosun.

TOISET

Oikein. Puosun, Puosun! Puosu laulaa »Iloisen meripojan».

PUOSU

No eihän teistä mihin pääse.

Laulu n:o 8.
 Mä meripojast' iloisesta laulun tein, hän paljon kulki meriä
hei heijuvei. Hän Jaappanissa tyttösiä rakasti, ja Kiinan hilsut
tarkallensa katasti.

Häll’ oma hilsu kuitenkin on Suomessa,

hän sille silkin osti Singaporesta,
mutta kauanpa hän sitä saanut pitää ei,
kun Kons-pa-tanttinoopelissa Fatima sen vei.

Hän uuden lahjan sitten osti Turkissa,

sen aikoi vasta Suomess’ ottaa kirstusta.
Mutta tuskinpa hän Napolihin pääsi kai,
niin Signorina Marita sen hältä sai.

No Napolista koralleja uudelleen

hän osti viedäksensä Suomen Ainolle,
mutta Lissaboniss’ hältä helmet katosi,
kun Donna Petronellan kanssa halasi.

Nyt meripoika viimein suuttui kovasti,

ja päätti lahjat ostaa vasta Englanniss’,
mutta rahat hältä Lily otti silloin juur’,
kun meripoika tälle sanoi I lowe you. [Ai löv juu.]

Hän Kööpenhaminassa jäikin puurihin

ja päätti rauhass’ antaa olla mampsellin,
kun »lille danske pige» vinkkas hälle näin:
»Kom du kjäre dejlig dreng» nyt tännepäin.

No liiat rahat Tivolissa meni kai, mutta meripoika hätäillyt ei,

vielä vai, hän Helsingissä silkin ostaa kaappasi, ja sanoi:
Rakas kulta, tää on Jaappanist’.
 (Puosu tekee tanssiliikkeitä joka värssyn jälkisoiton aikana
osoitellen muka eri maiden naisten tanssia. Laulun perästä nostavat
puosua.)

Eläköön puosu! Eläköön, eläköön!

PUOSU

Kiitoksia, kiitoksia! Ei tarvitse nostaa. Sehän on työntekemistä ja

nythän joutiloidaan.

MATTI

Puosu se sentään on paras laulaja koko joukosta tässä laivassa.

KINNARI

Ja hänellä on asioita mistä laulaa. Se on ollut vähän paikassaan ja

aina tiukasti remmissä.

MIKKONEN

Ja aina hyvä menestys naisväen keskuudessa.

SOINI

Mistäpä sen niin varmaan tietää?

MIKKONEN

No kuulithan sen laulustakin.

PUOSU
 Vai ei Soini usko? Hänellä kun on morsian Suomessa, niin muka
ylpeilee sillä. Mutta minullapa on hilsut joka paikassa.

SOINI

Suomessakin?

PUOSU

Suomessa hankin minä hilsun ensi päivänä ja komean hankinkin.

Eihän tuo lie miehestä entinen vetovoima niin haihtunut, ettei saa
kun hommaa! Ennen aikaan niitä juoksi jäljessäni niin, että piti
rumimpia kiviä paiskelemalla pitää ulompana. Niitä oli laumoittain
minun vanavedessäni.

KINNARI

Tahtoisin minäkin hiukan epäillä puosun tyttöonnea.

PUOSU

Sinullako muka olisi parempi? Ehkä vieläkin tahtoisit lyödä vetoa

ja hävitä punnan?

KINNARI

Miksi ei, kyllä minä siinä asiassa aina sinulle piisaan.

MATTI

Ja minä!
ARVI

Ja minä!

PUOSU (Matkien Arvia.)

Ja minä! Että aukaisitkin nokkasi! Kaikki tässä nyt minut laudoilta

löisivät, yksin kakaratkin.

KINNARI

Lyödään veto.

PUOSU

Lyödään vain.

MIKKONEN

Millä tavalla?

PUOSU

No se voittaa, jolla on ensiksi morsian, kun maihin päästään.

MUUT

Suostutaan.

PUOSU

Soini pois vedosta, kun sillä on jo hemesti Suomessa. Keitä yhtyy

vetoon?
 KINNARI, MIKKONEN, MATTI, ARVI ja joku statisteista.

Minä!

PUOSU

Entä Jaakopsonni!

JAAKOPSONNI

Eipä minua tarvita siinä hommassa.

MIKKONEN

Miksi ei. Kyllähän sinä jonkun ikälopun vielä saat.

JAAKOPSONNI

Minä sain jo ennen vanhaan tarpeekseni naisväestä.

PUOSU

Oletko ollut naimisissa?

JAAKOPSONNI

Olin minä kerran kolme päivää.

(Naurua.)

PUOSU

Aivanko oikein vihittynä ja kuulutettuna?

JAAKOPSONNI

Aivan oikein naimisissa.

KINNARI

No miten sinä niin vähästä kylläännyit?

JAAKOPSONNI

Päivässäkin olisi ollut tarpeeksi… Se sattui semmoinen

lohikäärme — minä karkasin yöllä ja pääsin kalaveneessä Ruotsin
puolelle.

(Naurua.)

PUOSU

Jaakopsonni jääköön pois, koska hän on niin säikytetty. Mikä on

vetosumma?

KINNARI

Kestit koko joukolle, kun asia on lukossa.

PUOSU

Olkoon. Se, joka ei saa morsianta jo toisena päivänä maihin

päästyämme, maksaa kestit.

TOISET

Aivan niin.
KINNARI

Ei, mutta minä jo innostun. Tässä täytyy vähitellen ruveta

ryysyjään korjailemaan ja koristuksiaan katselemaan, että voisi
näyttäytyä kaikessa komeudessaan kotipuolen tyttöihmisille.
Puosunkin täytyy ajaa partansa, että pääsee ihmisten kirjoihin.

PUOSU

Ehei pojat! Parrastahan ne tytöt vasta pitävätkin. — Kunhan vain

pukeudun oikein juhlavaatteisiini, niin siitä saavat olla kitukasvuiset
loitolla.

KINNARI

Älä kehu, lopussa kiitos seisoo.

SOINI

On siinä kaksikin kaunista.

PUOSU

Sitten vielä yksi asia: Muistattehan tuon pulskan merimieslaulun,

jonka opimme Newyorkissa ja johon sitten värkättiin suomalaisia
sanoja?

TOISET

Kyllä, tottahan nyt y.m.

PUOSU
 Harjoitetaanpa se oikein hyväksi, että saadaan vetää pulska
engelskalainen merimieslaulu, jos sattuu vieraita tulemaan laivaan
siellä kotona.

MIKKONEN

Veisataan vain.

PUOSU

Sadehatut joka miehen päähän, ja hihat ylös. Kyllä minä tiedän,

miten teatterissa tehdään. Nappula mukaan. Ja nyt pojat!
Repäistäänpäs oikein hurskaasti, että peräänkin kuullaan komea
laulu.

Kuoro n:o 9.

Kun ankkurit ylös hissattiin, niin peli se äänen antoi.

Muiston ne pojat kullastansa kotimaasta kantoi.
Toisto: Siis hurratkaamme vain, sillä se on tapamme ain’,
vaivoja me nähdä saamm’, jotka seilaamme ulkomailla.
Blow boys, blow, to California,
there is plenty of gold,
so I've been told,
in the banks of Sacramento.

[Bloo bois, bloo, tu Kalifoornja, thäär is plenti ov

gold, soo aiv biin told, in the bänks ov Sakramento.]

Ja ne tytöt, jotka Suomessa olivat ystävämme, ne pian

meidät unhoitit, olit pettäjämme. Toisto: Mutta hurratkaamme
vain, j.n.e.
 Eikä ne meitä muistakaan kun päivää viisi kuusi;
sitten on heillä ilo taas ja ystäväkin uusi.
Toisto: Mutta hurratkaamme vain, j.n.e.

Kun nämä lasit on maistettu, niin toimi tulee uusi.

Kova oli seelein komento, kun puuriin tuli »luusi».
Toisto: Siis hurratkaamme vain, j.n.e.

(Puosu voi tanssia toiston aikana yksin ja jäädä kauniiseen tanssi-

asentoon esiripun laskiessa; Miehet ovat vetävinään köyttä
tahdissa.)

Esirippu.
TOINEN NÄYTÖS

(Laiva on laiturissa, näyttämö sama kuin edellinen, ainoastaan

tausta toinen. Kauempaa ehkä näkyy kirkontorni, harvametsäinen
kukkula; vasemmalla on kulisseissa satamakatos, jonka katto on
näkyvissä; vasemmalla laivan laidassa on avonainen luukku, josta
näkyy laivaan pistetyn lautakäytävän pää. Edellisessä näytöksessä
näkyvä purje on poissa; sen takaa näkyy ehkä nyt ruorirattaan
yläreunaa. On pyhäpäivä, etäältä kuuluu kirkonkellon ääntä. Miehet
ovat juhlatamineissa.)

Kuoro n:o 1.

Juhlan rauha yli maiden saa, kaukaa hiljaa kellot kumajaa.

Helkkyy, välkkyy helo auringon, muistot vanhat mielessä

nyt on.

(Laulun jälkeen.)

KINNARI

Ja nyt kaupunkiin! Tämän pojan pitäisi kelvata.

MATTI

Entä tämän?

KINNARI

Sinä kelpaat, sanoi piru rokonarpiselle.

PUOSU

Mutta katsokaas minuakin! Näytänkö minä enää miltään

pikihousulta, jukoklavita? Minä käyn kapteenista milloin tahansa.

MIKKONEN

Pitääkö nytkin vahdin olla laivassa, päiväseen aikaan, kun ukko

itsekin vielä on täällä? Eihän hänen kotinsakaan ole tässä
kaupungissa.

PUOSU

Minä käyn kapteenilta kysymässä, kuka vahtiin jää.

(Menee.)

MATTI

Hänelle käy ohraisesti, jonka vahtiin on jäätävä.

KOKKI

Miten niin?
MATTI

No kun hän ei pääse morsianta itselleen katsomaan ja toiset

saavat sillä aikaa vapaasti häärätä.

KINNARI

Kyllähän se on niinkuin vedon hävinnyt, jonka on laivaan jäätävä.

Mikä siinä auttaa.

MATTI

Voisihan hän vuorostaan lähteä yöksi taipaleelle.

KINNARI

Nyt on jo toinen päivä maissa ja toisena päivänä oli määrä hilsun

olla niillä, jotka vetoon rupesivat. Kyllä se siippana siis on
viimeistään tänään saatava.

MATTI

Niinpä taitaa ja eihän se ole toisten syy, jos jonkun on vahtiin

jäätävä, — ukkohan sen määrää — kunhan vain ei sattuisi minun
kohdalleni.

KINNARI

Eikä minun.

ARVI
 Eikä minun.

PUOSU (Palaa.)

Ukko sanoi, että jungmannin on jäätävä vahtiin. Siis Arvin.

ARVI (Hämmästyen.)

Minunko?

PUOSU

Sinun juuri. Minkä minä sille mahdan.

ARVI

No nyt se myrkyn lykkäsi.

PUOSU

Sinun vuorosi tulee toisella kertaa.

ARVI

Entä veto?

PUOSU

Sen maksavat ne, jotka häviävät.

TOISET

Aivan niin.
ARVI

Mutta kun minä en saa olla edes mukana yrittämässä.

PUOSU

Kiipeä maston nokkaan ja huuda joka ilmansuunnalle, että tuokaa

morsian minulle.

TOISET (Nauravat.)

Se on hyvä neuvo. Hyvästi, morjensta vain!

PUOSU

Seis pojat! Koettakaa olla tuossa puolen päivän tienoissa laivassa,

sillä silloin minä olen täällä. Silloin aloitetaan ne yhteiset kestit — ja
juodaan minun kihlajaisiani.

KINNARI

Joko niin pian?

MIKKONEN

No on ne muillakin kihlajaiset silloin, kun puosullakin.

PUOSU

No mitä siinä enää leukailette. Marssikaa morsianta hakemaan.

TOISET
 Oikein! Kiireesti hakemaan! Hyvästi.

(Menevät.)

ARVI (Huutaa jälkeen.)

Onnea matkalle!

KOKKI

Ja oikein suuri eukko puosun kynkkään.

ARVI

Kummallekin puolelle!

KOKKI

Jos puosu toisi minullekin sieltä hemestin, kun hällä on niin hyvä
saalis.

ÄÄNI (Takaa huutaen.)

Mitä se kokki akalla, kun itse osaa keittää!

KOKKI (Arville.)

Kyllä minun tekisi mieleni sotkea jotakin nuuskaa puosun

keitoksiin sen konjakkivellin edestä. Oikeinko todella aiotte saada
morsiamen itsellenne, joka mies?

ARVI
 Kai puoleksi todella, puoleksi leikillä — tietysti. Miehet luulevat
syntyvän siitä jotakin hauskaa. Mutta joka tapauksessa veto on
maksettava ja eikö tuo minun osakseni jääne, sillä kai ne toiset
tuovat naisväkeä tänne laivaan — jollei muuten niin kurillaan.
Turkanen sentään.

KOKKI

No rupeaisitko sinä sitten kurillasi heilaa ottamaan, kenen vastaan

tulevan vain mukaasi saisit?

ARVI

Eipä taitaisi olla luontoa.

KOKKI

Niin minäkin luulen, ja jos häviätkin, niin juotetaan niille jotakin

kuraa. Kyllä minä koetan keksiä. Menen kaupunkiin tarkastelemaan
niiden vehkeitä; kyllä siellä nyt lystiä pidetään, se on varma.

NAPPULA (Tulee.)

ARVI

No eikö Nappula mene maihin?

NAPPULA

Perämies käski minun pysyä laivassa.

KOKKI
 No, kuori sitten perunat sillä aikaa kuin minä käväisen kaupungilla.

(Menee.)

ARVI

Olisitko vähän kannella, kun minä pistäyn kojussa.

(Nappula nyökäyttää päätään.)

(Arvi menee. Pitempi väliaika. Kellot soivat taas.

Nappula katsoo haaveillen kaukaisuuteen ja huokaa.)

Laulu n:o 2.

NAPPULA

Orpopoika onnetonna, isätönnä, äiditönnä, yksin kurja

kulkemassa, vaivainen vaeltamassa, itseksensä ilman alla,
tiellä tuntemattomalla. Ikävä on istuskella ikävämpi astuskella,
armopaloja anellen, vaivojansa vaikerrellen. Ei ole tuttuja
tuvissa, kavereita kartanoissa.

Kunhan minä kasvan isoksi, rupean kapteeniksi, tai perämieheksi

ja menen mihin tahdon. Ja minä seilaan vain isoilla vesillä
kesämaissa, löydän jonkun aarteen ja rikastun, ja sitten minä en syö
papuja ja läskiä kuin kerran kuukaudessa. Ja aina pitää olla
pannukakkua, ihan joka syöntikerta. Ja sitten kun minä tulen
rikkaana kapteenina kotipuoleen käymään, haen sisareni, olkoon
missä asti tahansa, ja annan hänelle oikein komean silkin ja vaatteet
ja rintaneulan, ja kengät ja hyvää ruokaa sekä nisu-ankkastukkia niin
paljon kuin haluttaa syödä. Ja sitten puhumme äitivainajasta ja sitten