Creating this web folio came with several challenges. Deciding on where I would post my folio was a challenge because of what I needed from the folio. I decided against reusing a website I created for my English 301 course because I thought it would be worthwhile to transfer the necessary components to a new page so that I would not have to rename old pages and delete old posts on the English 301 page that could be useful in the future.

While creating the new page I decided it would be necessary to create a website with a clean and attractive look to attract future employers in the sector that I would like to work in. Considering that I am not attempting to attract web designers or programmers, I decided that the site should look professional and only include elements that display my current skill set like my ability to write and create professional documents.

My main challenge with the site involved the material that is posted on it. Although the material, the assignments that I wrote for English 301 had been completed long before the creation of the website, this material needed editing. Suggestions had been made by my group members and professor to improve the quality of the materials which had yet to be implemented. Before I posted these materials, I edited them according to suggestions which were primarily about grammar, spelling, and what the documents were discussing. I also attempted to improve the documents by applying what I had learned during my English 301 course (like adding headings and subtitles) where appropriate.

In addition to this, there were technical problems. I was unaware that posts all had to be under one page on wordpress resulting in me having to delete many of my posts and paste the contents onto the English 301 Assignments page.

Writing My Definitions:

When I started the definition assignment, I decided to define the term debasement because I find the topic in classical numismatics to be fascinating. Although writing my parenthetical and sentence definitions was straightforward, writing my expanded definition of my term proved to be more difficult and time consuming due to the methods of expansion I used. Considering that a technical writer may need to create a new graphic if one for the topic being written about does not exist, I thought it would be prudent to make my own graphic. This turned out to be time consuming and labour intensive. I also discovered that I had to do more research than I originally thought I needed to because the document needed a works cited section.

Peer Review:

As fascinating the term I decided to define was, I found my definition to be very short compared to the expanded definition I reviewed. I think this is mostly due to the term that I decided to define being fairly simple to define. There may be a disconnect between me and the audience reading my definition, resulting in relevant information not being included due to my background. Producing an insightful peer review was straightforward. There were things I did not catch during my first read through Nicole’s document. I have discovered that, because my peer review partner and I are from different backgrounds, the mistakes we made and the style of writing we use in our writing are completely different.

Revisions:

I have learned that small oversights have affected the readability of the document. When I wrote my original definitions, I chose to use relatively simple language while writing in a formal tone as to not have the document appear too stuffy. I was also cautious to not use numismatic terminology that would confuse the reader without giving a parenthetical definition (as I did with the term denarius). Though I tried to use simple but descriptive language, there were still some financial terms in the document that I did not realize could be considered jargon. I have fixed this problem and the minor grammatical errors that were in the original document. I neglected to cite my graphic because I thought I did not need to cite my own creation (though I neglected to tell this to the person doing my peer review). Although the graphic was regular sized when I wrote the document on word, the image shrank when I inserted it into the word press page, making it hard to see on the original post. I have since made a revision to the graphic in the hyperlinked document.

Revised Definition: https://blogs.ubc.ca/engl30198a2022s12/2022/06/13/davids-revised-definition/

Nicole’s Peer Review of My Definition: https://blogs.ubc.ca/engl30198a2022s12/2022/06/10/nicoles-peer-review-of-davids-definition/