To: Nina Nakinishi, Author
From: Liam Plosker, Reviewer
Peer Review: Assignment 2.1: Formal Report Proposal for Introducing Virtual Talking Room to Remote Work Setting
First Impressions
This is a well-structured formal report proposal. The problem being addressed is clearly laid out, and a practical solution to it is proposed. Concise language is chosen throughout this document, making it straightforward and easy-to-read. The target audience is clearly outlined, and pertinent questions are asked in the scope, providing pragmatic, actionable next steps to examine this solution’s viability.
Organization
Sentences are succinct and use straightforward, but formal language. Because of this, the whole document flows easily when reading it. The tone remains professional, but is also accessible to the layperson.
The relevant bullet point questions in this document’s “scope” section and clear, chronological steps laid out in the “methods” section offer even greater clarity to the reader.
Expression
To reiterate, the writing very easy-to-follow. No cumbersome words are used where simpler ones would create less confusion. In other words, there are very few “stumbling blocks” in this document where the reader gets caught up on a certain expression, phrase, or word that may not be ubiquitous in everyday vocabulary. All of this allows the document to convey its points loudly, clearly, and without obstruction.
Content:
The idea of a virtual talking space for remote working, with the aim of increase efficiency by snuffing out miscommunication and minimising response times, is innovative and fresh.
It confronts the real, brass-tacks issues in contemporary remote-working – even prior to the pandemic. It builds on prior technologies, like Zoom, to create an even more open and accessible workplace that retains the comforts of working from home.
Spelling Mistakes/Overall Grammar:
Sound overall, scanning this document I did not notice any typos. However, I would suggest making a point of varying sentence length – shifting between shorter and longer sentences, so readers don’t get too weary of a text (for example, if there are a lot of consecutive, long-winded sentences).
Concluding Feedback:
This document is well-crafted with a professional tone to it. It relays the necessary information about the proposed innovation to its clearly laid out intended audience, without becoming bogged down in superfluous details.
It flows well, helped by its breathable, concise writing, and its well-thought-out, mostly-chronological organisation.
There are some minor stylistic suggestions for revision, such as changing up sentence length to a greater degree, but in terms of content, this is already a very robust formal writing proposal.
It was a pleasure reading this. If you have any questions regarding this feedback, I look forward to fielding them in a thorough and comprehensive way if, or as, they come up.
Link to the Peer Reviewed Formal Proposal: https://blogs.ubc.ca/engl30199c2022w2/2023/02/28/assignment-21-formal-report-nina/
Leave a Reply