Unit One Reflection Blog
The assignments in Unit One allowed me to gain a deeper understanding of my the unique qualities and discrepancies in my own and my peer’s writing.
While working on the Three Definitions Assignment, I chose to write about the term “Celiac Disease” as I feel that it is a fairly complex term that is of great importance to my discipline due to the relatively high prevalence and severe consequences of the disease. My decision to use the reading situation of a Registered Dietitian speaking to a patient is based on the professional applicability of this diagnosis, as my personal experience and academic background has revealed to me that many people are unaware of diet-related disorders that may be inflicting themselves or their families. In the sentence definition, I felt that it was of utmost importance to detail the common clinical signs and symptoms of the disorder, as these manifestations are the first means of diagnosis. The expanded definition included an analysis of parts in order to provide the reader with a more in-depth explanation of the technical components that come into play with this disorder. Etymology was chosen to accompany the history of the term, which together allow the reader to gain a better understanding of the historical context that led to the discovery of Celiac Disease. I felt that this information was useful to an individual who may feel lost in the scientific and nutritional realm that their disease falls into. Additionally, I utilized a visual for the reader to have a user-friendly reference for the diverse clincal manifestations of the disorder, which allows them to assess themselves in case of symptom onset, or to relay information about their disorder to loved ones. Completing this assignment gave me a better understanding of the term at hand, which inherently allowed me to gain insight into the importance of technical definitions in other contexts, especially when the reader may not be well-informed on the subject matter.
Completing a peer review of Kashish Garg’s definitions of “Meiosis” allowed me to increase my editorial skills through meticulous inspection of their document. I found that comparing his work to other examples of this assignment and the textbook explanations of the definitions allowed me to assess the quality of the work at hand. Overall, I was very impressed by the document that I read, which contained complete and concise explanations of meiosis and it’s parts. Besides the knowledge that I gained pertaining to Meiosis itself, I learned that my peer has a unique style of writing that lends itself well to the technical writing seen in this document. I found it very intersesting to compare the flaws that he found in my assignment to those that I found in his, as much of this analysis is subjective and depends largely on the editor. For instance, Kashish recommended that I restate my sentence definition after the visual, since they encompassed the same general aspects of my term. In contrast, I made note of a weakness that he repeated his sentence definition in his expanded definition, as I felt that this was too repetitive. In hindsight, I believe that both of our points are useful techniques for our particular writing styles. I believe that Kashish and I can learn from the unique ways that our peers, including one another, performed this assignment.
After examining the peer review that Kashish completed for my assignment, I made note of the suggestions and edited my document accordingly. Overall, I felt that my peer provided me with honest highlights and weaknesses of my document, which he relayed in a professional and friendly manner that made my work feel validated. I also feel that his recommendations were useful and informative, especially those pertaining to major mistakes such as incorrect use of APA style in my citations. He pointed out that my work tended to be quite wordy, which I acknowledge could be seen as a flaw (and edited accordingly) though I believe it is a component of my unique writing style. I believe that making the adjustments as recommended by my peer allowed me to improve my document to one that was more concise, informative, and organized. I appreciate the time and effort that Kashish put into the peer review as I feel that this assignment benefitted both his and my technical writing skills. Attached below is my revised definition assignment and the related review.