To: Cheryl Chao, member of Peanut
From: Amy Yung, member of Peanut
Date: October 16, 2019
Subject: Peer Review of your Proposal – Improving Data Collection Accuracy at Fairview Behavior Consulting Inc.
Link to Proposal: https://blogs.ubc.ca/engl301-99a-2019wa/2019/10/11/formal-report-proposal-improving-data-collection-accuracy-at-fairview-behaviour-consulting-inc/
Hi Cheryl, the document, “Proposal for Improving Data Collection Accuracy at Fairview behavior Consulting Inc.” has been reviewed. The proposal is detailed and easy to read, but it could be improved with the following suggestions:
First Impressions:
Overall, this proposal is well-organized and detailed. All professional terms are clearly defined and explained after being introduced. However, there are some grammar issues and typos that need to be revised. Moreover, the sections, statement of problem and proposed solution, may need revision due to insufficient explanation and lack of focus.
Overall document layout and design:
The document is well-organized with bolded sub-headings for easy reading. Moreover, the scope section has a clear format using indentations and bullet points.
Introduction:
The introduction is detailed where each professional term used is defined. Moreover, it gives insight into the profession of behaviour interventionists. However, it does not clearly introduce why data collection inaccuracy is causing an issue to the company. Although it is addressed in the next section, the introduction section would be stronger if a brief statement is included to address this issue. It would better inform the reader of what to expect in the next section.
Statement of Problem:
The statement of problem is clearly stated and gives examples of how the problem can cause issues during meetings. However, it does not clearly state the impact of the problem towards the company, client and behavioural interventionists. This section could be improved if these questions were addressed:
- What happens when two behaviour interventionist gets differing data?
- How does differing data affect in assisting the child?
- Would the data trials have to be redone? (Costly in time?)
Proposed Solution:
The proposed solution is informative and explained thoroughly. However, there are two proposed solutions, but the sub-heading is singular. The proposal for implementing an online folder can be incorporated into the second solution, but it must be addressed in the previous section. In regards to the second solution, further information regarding what happens during team meetings is needed. It is confusing when the solution is being explained without sufficient information. Moreover, this section could be improved if these questions were addressed:
- How does this solution fix the current problem?
- How does increasing mutual understanding lead to having correct data trials?
- How does eliminating ineffective styles fix the current problem?
Scope:
The questions to be addressed in the formal report are well-thought out. However, the first question seems unnecessary as the information is still being shared within the company and not necessarily online. Perhaps a revision of the question would be, “Are parents willing to have their children’s information shared with other staff?”
Methods:
The methods to obtain data that are well-chosen where interviews and surveys will provide for further insight to the problem. However, the focus of the interviews and survey should be investigating the cause and impact of the problem. The focus proposed is whether permission is allowed to implement the proposed solution. Without sufficient data to understand why there are differing data between behaviour interventionists, implementing the proposed solution would not aid in finding the root cause. Instead, the focus should be on how the problem is affecting all parties involved. It is important to survey the staff to find if differing data between one another is causing problems in aiding the client. Moreover, if the staff is having trouble aiding clients due to issues with data, it would be wise to ask what they would like to change and if they think the proposed solution would fix the problem.
My Qualifications:
The qualifications stated are more than sufficient to investigate and solve the problem of differing data between behavioural interventionists. However, this section can benefit if there was a brief statement addressing how this issue has been affecting behaviour interventionists and why it should be fixed.
Conclusion:
The conclusion is brief and conclusive. However, this section could be improved if a brief explanation of why this proposal topic has been chosen and why the problem should be addressed.
Grammar/Typos:
The proposal contains some typos and grammar issues. They are listed below:
- Statement of Problem:
- It seems the last sentence should be “…correct data trials with one interventionist and incorrect data trials with one interventionist.”
- Proposed solution:
- In the third sentence, it is missing a word: “… watching a consultant’s demonstration…”
- Scope:
- The first sentence is missing a word: “…I will use these questions…”
- The first question can omit “be”: “…can have their children’s information shared online?”
- Methods:
- In the second sentence, a comma can be used and “conducting” can be replaced with “interviewing”: “…conduct surveys on parents, co-workers and interviewing Ms. Pan.”
- In the third sentence, a comma can be added after “hopefully” and it should be “can” and not “could”: “Hopefully, I can get…”
- My Qualifications:
- In the first sentence, a comma needs to be added after “student”: “…psychology student, therefore…”
- In the second sentence, it should be “learned”: “I have learned about…”
Concluding comments:
Overall, the proposal is detailed and the topic seems to be a good choice to do research on. Below are some areas that should be revised or further expanded on:
- Wordy sentences: use commas or split the sentences into two
- Focus: the proposal lacks focus on why this problem is being investigated and why it should be resolved
- Provide information on the impact of the problem to the company, client and behaviour interventionists
- Insufficient information: give background information before introducing events such as team meetings and sessions with the client
It has been a pleasure reviewing this proposal. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Amy
Leave a Reply