{"id":57,"date":"2019-12-16T10:44:29","date_gmt":"2019-12-16T17:44:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/acoschizza\/?page_id=57"},"modified":"2019-12-20T00:59:35","modified_gmt":"2019-12-20T07:59:35","slug":"pr-par","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/acoschizza\/best-work\/pr-par\/","title":{"rendered":"Peer Review of Technical Definition: Photosynthetically Active Radiation"},"content":{"rendered":"

Assignment 1.3: Peer Review of Technical Definitions<\/strong><\/p>\n

For this assignment, I had the opportunity to peer review Brian Wang’s definition of “Photosynthetically Active Radiation.” As a non-biology student, this definition was organized in a logical manner, and provided good background and context.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Peer Review for: Brian Wang, ENGL 301 Student<\/p>\n

Peer Review by: Andree Coschizza, \"\", ENGL 301 Student<\/p>\n

Date: September 26, 2019<\/p>\n

Peer Review of: Definitions Assignment: Photosynthetically Active Radiation<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

First\u00a0<\/strong>Impressions<\/b><\/p>\n

Thank you for allowing me to look over your definition of Photosynthetically Active Radiation for Unit 1.3, excellent job! This is an engaging, well-delivered definition. If I were a supervisor, I would approve this with just a few changes. Some suggestions for further improvement are outlined below:<\/p>\n

Organization<\/strong><\/p>\n

The definition is well organized and logical. Particularly successful is the order of first defining the acronym, and then ending with how PAR measurement can be useful. The whole assignment has good segues from one part to the next.<\/p>\n

Expression<\/strong><\/p>\n

PAR is defined in a logical and straightforward manner. It is clear that the expansion strategies used are: etymology, operating principle, negation and analysis of parts. However, specific jargon is used that may not be familiar to an engineer (the intended audience). Including a parenthetical definition for words such as “stomata” or “chlorophyll” will help avoid confusion.<\/span><\/p>\n

Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n

The introduction outlines the purpose of the assignment and the intended audience (an engineer improving a lab-built sensor). However, ensuring that the introduction also outlines the criteria of the assignment will comply with the requirements of Assignment 1.3.<\/p>\n

Definition<\/strong><\/p>\n

Parenthetical Definition:<\/em><\/p>\n

PAR is well defined parenthetically, great job! However, this definition may be made more clear by exemplifying this definition in parentheses, or explaining that a a parenthetical definition can be a fragment within parentheses. In this way, it reaffirms your knowledge on exactly how to use such a definition.<\/p>\n

Sentence Definition:<\/em><\/p>\n

The sentence definition is very clear, yet concise. Nice work!<\/p>\n

Expanded Definition:<\/em><\/p>\n

The expanded definition provides a much more comprehensive view of PAR, and is structured in a way that considers a non-technical audience. Particularly, breaking down PAR into two definitions is an effective tool to introduce the definition. Etymology, operating principle, negation and analysis of parts is clearly shown.<\/p>\n

Visuals<\/strong><\/p>\n

Visual is clear and reinforces the definition. Citation is correct, great job!<\/p>\n

Grammar\/Typos<\/strong><\/p>\n

For the most part, grammar is consistent throughout the definition. However, just one note that for the first sentence of the last paragraph, the word “varies” is used, although I think you mean to use “various.”<\/p>\n

Works Cited<\/strong><\/p>\n

Works cited list is in proper format. However, referencing at least three outside sources will meet the requirement of the assignment.<\/p>\n

Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n

Overall, this assignment is very effective and is considerate of a non-technical audience. Some recommendations include:<\/p>\n