Self-writing Assignments<\/u><\/p>\n
From self-introduction to peer-reviewing, unit one has effectively introduced the concept of what technical communication is and we have put our knowledge into practice with small assignments. More importantly, I get to learn the principles of technical writing in business\/professional contexts and organize a writing team to collaboratively work on drafting a formal report. From the \u2018definition assignment\u2019, I explored the three different types of definitions, and what to keep in mind when the writing is directed to non-technical readers.<\/p>\n
Peer review<\/u><\/p>\n
Writing a well-structured peer review was a challenging part for me as I do not have extensive experience when it comes to reviewing others\u2019 work. Yet I found the peer review assignment valuable and interesting. I enjoy reading Chris\u2019s work and managed to give some suggestions in terms of the organization and integrity of the concept. Moreover, from reading other teams\u2019 peer reviews, I now understand that the formula for writing a peer review is an organized process, there are also common mistakes people can make. This helps me to develop useful comments and critiques of the subject in an encouraging way.<\/p>\n
Revising Definitions<\/u><\/p>\n
Upon reading the feedback from my peer Benson, he provides me constructive and fair comments that reveal my strength and weaknesses. He pointed out several of my unnecessary grammar mistakes that could have been improved for better comprehension. The edits made me believe that I can now provide readers clear communication. I also realized that my first parenthetical definition was not correctly applied and used, it does not need a lengthy explanation. I also corrected a few citation errors and revised my article with better integrity.<\/p>\n
Following by the Revised definition assignment:<\/p>\n
Peer Review of Definition: Global Positioning System (GPS)<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n