I found writing the definitions quite challenging. I chose the word “Bacteriophage” which I am quite familiar with but having to explain it at a basic level was more difficult that I had anticipated. This definition was written with a novice in mind – for example a fellow writing student who is majoring in a non-science specialty. I found the expansion methods in the textbook helpful in providing some guidance. I struggled with finding pertinent information to include – information that would better help the understanding of the term; I wanted to try to avoid unnecessary facts.
Dakota’s review of my work was great, she made really excellent points. One thing Dakota pointed out was that the sentence definition was shorter than the sentence used in the parenthetical definition. I had followed the structure of word>class>distinguishing features, as outlined in the text and felt that it adequately met the criteria. I did try to expand it upon Dakota’s suggestion, and I think it may be more detailed and clear now having the extra information included. Secondly, it was noted that the organization was sub-par and as such, it appeared as if I did not use an adequate number of expansion techniques. This was a really good suggestion and I feel the definition is much more clear with the added subsections.
I enjoyed the peer review process for Russel’s definition of the term “singularity”. I had heard the term before but was not familiar with the meaning. I was glad to not be familiar with the term as it allowed me to read it through as an actual non-technical reader. I think this allows for a more accurate review, rather than the writer trying to read from that point of view.
I learned that a peer review is supremely helpful in that it brings in the experience of another. I think it is a very challenging task to explain a familiar term to someone who is not familiar with it, and this exercise shows that. It is often difficult to critique our own work and I think this peer review process is very important.
Peer Review: https://blogs.ubc.ca/engl301-99c-2018wc/2019/01/22/peer-review-for-alicia-degelder/
Revised definitions: 301_Definitions_peer reviewed_alicia degelder_2019-03-19