In Unit 3 we designed surveys and compiled data for our Formal Proposal. We submitted a draft to our team for peer review.

Formal Proposal 

            I found the Formal Proposal assignment fun. I chose to research how commuting and employment affected study time and course selection for UBC students and made recommendations on how to improve distance education at UBC. The topic I chose was close and personal to me. Living in Squamish means I must take at least 7-8 hours of my day to get to 2 classes. If there were more availability online, I could take more classes. I concluded there must be a whole cohort of adults who felt and thought the same. Designing the surveys on Qualtrics was a bit of a challenge. It has been a long time since I have used the program, and I required a few refreshers to figure out the formatting. Distributing the surveys went differently than I anticipated. Initially, I was going to post on Reddit, only to learn that Reddit only accepts post-graduate research that has been ethically approved. My PSYC instructor agreed to let me post the survey on the class Piazza discussion board, and I found another relevant Facebook group to post in too. I was worried that this would be more of an in-person collection of data scenario, which at the time felt tedious and daunting. But the online survey made it enjoyable. The compilation of the data into charts and graphs was my favourite. I enjoyed watching the data come to life and tell a story. Interviewing the instructors was also fun and yielded totally opposing views. Compiling the professors’ responses with the data and supporting literature resulted in a robust analysis section.

            Writing the proposal draft seemed hard at first, but once I got on a roll, I worried my assignment would be too long. Conciseness is not my strong suit, so this is challenging me to practice it. The writing plan that I made up in a previous assignment was invaluable. Sticking to it helped me to stay ahead with writing, and as a result, I finished more than I needed to. I even had to make a separate draft as I had already written up the letter of transmittal and references. When I started this proposal, I kept thinking about how to improve the students’ problems. I realized that I had to emphasize what UBC would gain from my recommendations and that helping the students is a secondary benefit. It was good practice and had me reflect on my real-life work emails where I can get caught in this trap. I look forward to writing them better to see if I can achieve better outcomes.

Peer Review

            The peer review was also fun to do. Though the reviews always take me a lot longer than I anticipated. I provided so many suggestions I was worried that I might come across as being harsh. This time I edited thoroughly to remove any “persons” and avoided all imperative verbs. The peer review included revisions suggesting numerous paragraph and heading changes, and I found it difficult to write it clearly. It is much easier to illustrate these changes while editing over Google Docs, or in person. I hope this peer review illustrated what I have learned from writing the previous two. I also hope that I was able to provide some valuable feedback.

Upon receiving my peer review, I found that most of my revisions focused on formatting, which I expected as it was a first draft. My reviewer suggested I resize my visuals to make them larger and to clarify a few points in the definitions. She also pointed out that sentences don’t usually start with numbers. I was unsure if this differed for a data section, and after some research concluded she was correct. I revised all the sentences to the proper formatting. I felt overall that there weren’t too many things to alter which bolstered my confidence that I was on the right track.

Closing Thoughts

            Overall, I feel I have been keeping up with all the assignments well and that my writing is improving. I still must re-look up APA citation/reference formatting every time I use it. I do not often use it in my everyday life. Grammar continues to be a struggle for me, but I have also learned a few mistakes I tend to repeat and can now self-correct them. I look forward to compiling the web folio to showcase the semester’s assignments.

I have attached my Formal proposal Drafts as a PDF and as a Word doc below.

Formal Proposal Draft PDF

Formal Proposal Draft

In Unit 2, we wrote a best practice memo for LinkedIn networking practices, the start, an outline, and a peer review of the formal proposal.

LinkedIn

I found creating a list of top practices for creating a LinkedIn profile relatively easy. There was a superfluity of blogs and information on the internet advising how to optimize LinkedIn profiles, and many echoed each other. I feel less daunted at updating my LinkedIn profile after conducting the research. I also learned that LinkedIn has abundant resources for networking, professional development, and educational content. I now believe it to be a valuable tool for networking before I felt a little blasé toward it.

Formal Report

On the topic of my formal report, brainstorming and preparing were overwhelming and a bit scary. I was unsure if I could propose a problem to solve that would be long enough for the assignment. Interviewing people also created some anxiety as I’m not exceedingly outgoing or physically on campus regularly. However, once I found an issue I related to and was passionate about, designing an outline became easy. The data to support my proposal will be assembled from an online Qualtrics survey. Using an online survey decreases my anxiety. I also hope to interview a couple of professors once my questions get approved. I feel confident that I will be able to keep up with the progress of my proposal. The writing schedule component of the memorandum assigned this week was a great idea and will help me keep on track.

Peer Review Process & Writing

Regarding this week’s peer review, I found it much more challenging than the first peer review. I reviewed Jade Duan’s proposal. In all honesty, I am not entirely sure why I struggled. I didn’t grapple with the content of my peer’s proposal, but more with the how-to structure of the feedback. I forgot to leave out the “person” tense and had to go back and make some corrections. Jade gave me feedback to add citations to my proposal which would strengthen my argument. My professor also evaluated my writing and provided some examples of how I could enhance my peer review. In the process, I learned to avoid imperative verbs by writing my correcting the peer review and the memo assignment.

I can see that my writing is improving through these exercises, and I am confident I will do much better on my third peer review. I often enjoy reading my team’s proposals, peer reviews, and the other teams’ writing. I appreciate that we all have very different writing styles. Sometimes I find myself drawing on their writing style or revising my content as I see a better example of conciseness. A couple of my team members have formal proposals that I can directly relate to. I am excited to read all their formal proposals as their topics are diverse and unique. Overall, I am enjoying this course and look forward to these coming weeks.

Link to my Formal Proposal

Link to Jade’s Peer Review of my Proposal

The Writing Process

In unit 1 of ENGL 301, we were asked to write a technical definition of a complex term targeted toward a non-technical audience. We then got it peer-reviewed, reviewed a partner’s definition, and provided feedback.

I chose the term, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) from the medical field. Having honed the skills of articulating complex concepts into laymen’s terms I assumed that writing a technical definition would have been easy. I was surprised to learn it was more challenging than anticipated, specifically, writing without using jargon or overcomplicating the explanation. I learned that there were three types of definitions. The first two definitions were the easiest to write. Firstly, parenthetical definitions are the shortest and use parenthesis to quickly expand or clarify terms. Secondly, sentence definitions are slightly longer than parenthetical sentences and are used to describe expressions. Lastly, expanded definitions use diverse methods to illustrate the term’s meaning.

I used the four methods in my expanded definition which I thought would be most educational. The method of Required Conditions described what an fMRI does. Visuals illustrated the machine and the images it produces. The Operating Principle explained how the machine works, and finally, the method of Negation demonstrated what an fMRI does not do. The most challenging to write was the Operating Condition method. It conventionally includes large amounts of jargon. It also required that I research precisely how an fMRI machine works and break down each step into comprehensive concepts. I struggled to write the least complicated explanation and it took several attempts and revisions before getting it right. I chose to let a family member (who had no expertise in this field) read it, prior to publishing, to gauge my success.

Peer Review Process

After our team had completed their definitions, I partnered with Michael Ly. We reviewed each other’s writing, and each provided feedback about the style and content. I admired the conciseness of my peer’s definitions and tried to apply that to my assignment. His formatting techniques (bolding instead of italicizing every subheader under the Expanded Definition) made the reading process undemanding and inspired me to see how I could improve my blog layout. I contributed suggestions on making his Compare and Contrast method more coherent, which would help the audience envisage a clearer picture of Akathisia. My partner provided valuable feedback, especially regarding the Operating Principle section. He pointed out that hemoglobin was jargon and encouraged me to rewrite it differently. He recommended formatting tips and suggested some introductory/transitionary sentences to improve flow. Overall, I appreciated the peer review process. It gave me a new perspective and shined a spotlight on my blind spots (like too much jargon). Admittedly I found providing balanced (positive and critical) feedback challenging; I valued the tone of Michael’s review.

Revision Process

After the peer review, I received feedback to implement. My partner provided clear suggestions, and they were straightforward to execute. Michael had suggested advising the reader why an MRI scanner is loud and small, which forced me to spend a bit of time researching the answers to provide a correct definition. I successfully removed the jargon, namely the word hemoglobin, and simplified the concepts. I also reformatted my document with bold headings and rearrangement of the images, which improved visual appeal. My writing was clearer and easier to read post the revisions. I am grateful for the feedback and see the value of peer reviews. It was an enjoyable challenge to undertake.

Link to Original Definition

Link To The Peer Review

Link to Revised Definition

Dear Jade,

Thank you for your application, upon review it would be a pleasure to have you join our writing team.

Our team of three, myself, Angi Zhou, and Michael Ly, are looking for a dynamic, fun, and unique individual such as yourself to join us. I noted you have previously written a thesis – no easy task – and achieved high academic grades regarding your writing; our team offers you a place to hone your skills even further. Your agility and diligence will be an asset to our group work. As most of us are or were in the healthcare field, your background experience in gaming, history, and math is certain to bring a unique perspective to our writing assignments.

I look forward to working with you and on behalf of my team, I hope you accept this offer.

Kind regards,

Amy McCoan

Dear Michael,

Thank you for taking the time to review my application letter. I am delighted to accepted your offer to join your writing team.

Your extensive experience working with teams will undoubtedly be appreciated going forward. I imagine transitioning from pharmaceuticals to computer science requires versatility and resilience, both of which will be an asset to our team. Although we both struggle with grammar, I hope to learn and grow alongside you as we navigate writing proposal and improving our technical writing skills.

I have reached out to Angie Zhou and have accepted her invitation as well.

I look forward to working with you.

Sincerely, 

Amy McCoan

Dear, Angie,

Thank you for reviewing my application letter and reaching out to request me for your writing team. I hope I am not too late, I would be thrilled to accept your invitation. Upon reviewing the your application letter I think we would be a good fit. I believe your collaborative team experience and your placement at BCIT would make you an excellent asset to this team. I appreciate the tenacity it took to write 40 cover letters and resume and look forward to your enthusiasm with our projects.

Thank you for reaching out to Michael Ly and Emilyn, I will review their application letters and contact them as well.

I look forward to working with you.

Kind regards,

Amy McCoan

MEMORANDUM

To:                   Erika Paterson (Instructor)

From:              Amy McCoan (Student)

Date:               January 22, 2023

Subject:           Writing Team Application Letter

As you requested in Unit 1.2, I have completed the application letter to join the Professional Writing Team in ENGL 301.

As per the assignment outline my application letter includes:

• A brief description of my writing experience both academically and professionally and my writing interests.
• Some examples of writing I have composed as a registered nurse and academically.
• My experience in group projects and solo initiatives.
• My strengths, weaknesses, and learning philosophy concerning writing.

Please take the time to read my application letter thoroughly for grading and feedback, I have attached it below.

Thank you for creating enjoyable assignments to practice business communication.

301 A. McCoan Application Letter