Sept 21: Application letters & Definitions

Good Monday morning 301

I have passed the weekend reading your application letters and sending off your first Evaluation sheets. I should be completed this task by mid week.  Based on your letters, I have offered many of you advice on self-editing. The most common advice I have  is ‘eliminate unnecessary words.’  Why? Because a general rule of technical and professional writing is to always assume your reader[s] is a busy person. 

The second most common error is a grammar error: breaking  the subject/verb agreement rule. Please do follow the link and check out the rule.

Writing Teams:

The first of the Writing Team assignments is due Sept 27th, accordingly writing teams will need to be formed before that date. As soon as you have found your team – of four, please post your team name along with each members name on our Group Face Book page, and I will create a Team Forum for you.

Lesson 1:3: 

With lesson 1:3 assignments you are practicing two writing techniques:

1. The art of definition for an ‘unknowing’ reader.
2. The art of Peer Review and self-editing based on review

 Assignment 1:

Definitions: keep your focus on satisfying the needs of a novice reader and follow the instructions in our textbook closely.

Assignment 2:

Peer Review is likely to challenge a number of you.

I have a few tips for you to follow:

• Your task is to provide feedback, both positive and critical — on all relevant elements of the document.

Begin by creating a list of the important parts of the document.

For example:

• Is the document appropriately titled, dated and contain the author’s name?
• Is the assignment introduced — breifly?
• Is the ‘setting’ for the definition and the audience clearly defined or described?
• Is the chosen term appropriate for the assignment?  If so, why? If not, why not?
• Are the diagrams or visuals helpful? If so, why? If not, why not?
• Are the visuals correctly labelled and cited?
• Proof read for typos, spelling, and phrasing and suggest improvements where required, and/or comment on the quality of the writing positively.
• What makes it good writing?
• Finally, re-read the document and ask yourself – have the audience’s needs be met?  If so, why? If not, why not?

You can add to the above list, and you also have a hand-out to help your phrase your comments for this first peer review.

The point is to know what you are looking for before you begin to read the document.

Be sure to provide a  review that is complete and both positive and critical.

Be sure to also concern yourself with the organization and layout of your peer review. Follow the textbook guidelines on organization and layout.