1. All the budgets fail to answer the “so what” question, which is mentioned in writing tool 40. In “Rush”,  the author said he/she think the topic would be interesting, but the author didn’t explain why the reader will be interested in the topic. Also, as for me, I would ask why should I care about the barre exam or the dancers?
2. The whoevers and Dance Revolution failed to come up with solid story idea. In the whoevers, the author raised a series interesting questions, but didn’t mention the main theme and angle of the article. In the Dance Revolution, the author only introduced the background information of stunts but didn’t mention what story he or she is going to explore. Does the author only want to introduce the stunts? Or the author wants to explain why the trend raised? Or the author wants to explore the effects this trend would cause?
3. Except the Rush and Dance Revolution, the rest budgets lack of interview sources.
4. All the budgets didn’t mention what tools do they need to build the story. I think the method of “saving string” mentioned in writing tool 44 is really useful.

I’m assuming each of these entries has been submitted by a different student (given wording in the assignment) and am also working from the definition of “budget” as given in Mod 4.  With that in mind and from readings in Writing Tools, I’ll venture the following critiques:

1. All of these budgets lack background stories from which to draw. Not only is the need for previous stories in the description we’ve been given of budgets but would also constitute the gathering of “strings” from which to build a story, as mentioned by Clark (writing tool 44).  For instance, the budget for “Rush” could include stories about effectiveness of physical activity to reduce stress, stress experienced by college students, and appeal of studios such as this (in compare/contrast to other types of physical activity).  The same could be said about each of the other budgets since none includes researched background.
2. It seems that each of these falls short on the identifying the point of the story (writing tool 42). Rush and Barre Exam both sound interesting but the proposals come across as promotions of a particular workout trend.  There is probably a bigger story that would move them beyond sounding promotional or limited in scope to say something about the fitness/lifestyle picture.  The CAPS story seems more focused initially.  Assuming that data upholds the statement about increasing usage of the counseling center, the questions posed are relevant and important.  However, the question about eating disorders seems tacked on, without context.  The proposal on the Indian Dance Revolution obviously appeals to a particular audience, which is not made clear; in addition, it does not lead anywhere.  I feel bad for the teams that need help choreographing stunts … but the proposal doesn’t tell us that help is on the way.  The #Whoevers story also sounds interesting but could be more finely tuned to the point.  It seems to focus on couples’ and wedding planners’ reactions, which are valid questions in themselves.  After all, maybe this would appear in a wedding planning publication (in which case it would also be interesting to consider how the couple would control guests use of technology!).  But, a broader point could be how immersion in technology removes us from the moment, going beyond weddings to many other situations.

3. Writing tool 40, from Clark, focuses on having a mission statement as a guiding principle. Having a mission helps to put individual stories within that broader framework.  It’s not possible to tell with any certainty from these brief budgets if an underlying mission has been developed.  However, there are none apparent in any of them.  As Clark suggested, it is a good question to consider at the onset.  In the case of the Rush and Barre Exam proposals, for instance, a mission statement might help place these trends within the larger fitness picture, perhaps writing from the perspective that there is something for everyone and that each person can find what works best for him or her.

1. “Do Your Homework Well in Advance.” I notice that most of these budgets do not contain abundant lists of contacts. I have learned the hard way that it is far easier (in the long run) to research and reach out to many experts in your field, more than you think you will ever have the time/opportunity to formally interview. Interviews *will* fall through–you and your subjects alike have lives. People get sick. People have family emergencies. People have to cancel. But if you have already identified other subjects (and ideally reached out to them at least once), it’s easier to schedule another interview and move forward. It’s also nice when you’ve researched a field thoroughly enough that when one of your interviewees starts referencing another expert, you’re already at least familiar with the name.
2. “Draft a Mission Statement for Your Work.” I was intrigued by the idea for “(Indian) Dance Revolution.” As a former dancer, anything about dance piques my interest. But I was missing the “why” in this budget. I care about this idea because I like dance, but why should anyone else care? It might help this individual to sit down and write out what they’re really trying to accomplish with this piece.
3. “Break Long Projects Into Parts.” I really like the idea for “#TheWhoevers.” Catchy little title, too. But I feel like there’s lots of territory to be covered here. Is this a piece that would better be broken into several parts about social media and weddings in general?