Peer Review: Formal Report Draft

To: Delsther James Edralin, ENGL 301 Student, <dedralin@student.ubc.ca>

From: Justin Tang, ENGL 301 Student, <jtang102@student.ubc.ca>

Subject: Peer Review of Formal Proposal Draft

Date: April 3, 2023

Thank you for submitting this proposal for determining the feasibility of revising library procedures upon prevention of stress and distractions in UBC libraries.

Title Page:

• Current title can be changed to avoid confusion. Something straightforward such as “Revising Library Procedures to Prevent Stress and Distractions at UBC Libraries”
• Contents are ordered appropriately (Title, Recipient, Author, and Submission Date)
• Good use of running head to inform how your report is relevant to the reader

Introduction:

• The “Background on UBC Library Policies and Procedures” section does a great job in explaining the current policies that are in place and rules that UBC libraries currently follow to implement the procedures that they use.
• The “An Overview of the Issues from Current Procedures” section explains the current problems that stem from their rules. Specifically naming stuff is good to show that it is not one specific policy, but a collection of them
•  The “Purpose of the Report” concisely explains explains  the significance of the report and the purpose
• The “Background on Library Practices that Focuses on User Experiences” provides great alternatives that are taken from other libraries and case studies
• The “Research Methods” and “Limitations of the Study” explains well what methods you used and what are the limitations of the study (small sample size that is not reflective of all the libraries at UBC)
• “Scope of Inquiry” includes six sections that that are each relevant to the purpose of the report and will help to provide evidence towards whether UBC’s library policies and procedures can be changed

Data Section:

• Headings and subheadings can be bolded to help create separation for the reader and creates a cleaner looking report
• All the data headings should be under one umbrella, then the subheadings for the different types of data collection. An example of this would be “Data Section” then “I. Student Perceptions on the Current and Revised Library Procedures”, “II. UBC Libraries and its Current Environment” etc. This will make it easier for the reader to know they are still in the Data Section of the report
• Most of the  figures from your survey are very easy to understand and well suited to your report, there are a few that can be fixed so that the labels are not stacked on top of each other
• Consistent professional, objective, and positive tone throughout
• For the data section, you should avoid interpreting the results. This should be saved for the end section of “Summary and Interpretation of Findings”. The data section section should be focused on showing what you found and collected through your surveys and secondary research

Conclusion

• One suggestion is to focus on interpreting what your data signifies, an example of this can be 89% of respondents support changing the current policies to be more responsive as they find the current procedures being highly disruptive
• A paragraph focused on the secondary finding can help present the feasibility of the study more towards the audience, showing them that different procedures are effective
• The recommendations are realistic and relate to the data presented in the data section.

References

• Correct format and implementation of MLA format

This is an impressive document that provides many compelling reasons to change UBC library policies and procedures. This could allow students to have a less disruptive learning space. I hope these suggestions will aid you during the revision process. Thank you and please contact me at jtang102@student.ubc.ca to ask any questions.

Delsther Formal Draft Report