Assignment 3.3 – Peer Review of Formal Report Draft

To: Karolina Atehortua, ENGL 301 Student

From: Liam Plosker, ENGL 301 Student

Subject: Peer Review of Formal Report Draft

 

Presentation:

This document looks sound and reads smoothly. The incorporation of simple but effective visuals into it helps to buttress the arguments being made and also keeps the document feeling breathable.

The table of contents is easy to navigate, and each section is clearly defined. Additionally, the title page and working title appear clear and professional, providing a good first impression to the reader.

 

Content:

You haven’t relied too heavily on a single source, but have instead branched out and cited a lot of high-quality sources to glean your statistics and information. You also use comparison well to further underpin the arguments made in this document. Your comparison of Metrotown to the West Edmonton Mall and its navigational challenges helps to put this proposed app’s efficacy in context.

You maintain an objective tone throughout this document, weighing both sides against one another equally – the feasibility concerns surrounding such an app against the potential benefits an app could afford. This imparts a sense of impartiality and professionalism to the reader, and puts the onus squarely on the reader to decide where the facts stand.

You outline your report clearly from the start. You provide a good overview of the topics you will cover before diving more deeply into each of them, which allows readers to get their bearings and eases them in to the arguments you are presenting in this document.

You also canvas public opinion well with eighty-eight responses in the surveys you have conducted, which you cite your data from throughout this document.

Your six questions under your scope of inquiry are also thought-provoking, and your intended audience, the owner of Metrotown Mall, is clearly defined.

 

Grammatical Errors/Constructive Feedback:

The overall tone of this document is professional and easy-to-read. I would suggest referencing previous sections, where relevant, in following sections, so readers don’t forget relevant parts they have already read.

It’s okay to remind readers of things covered in previous sections, if it is relevant. Repetition helps to drive home a point, and is not always redundant (context-depending).

 

Concluding Thoughts:

On the whole, this is a well-formatted, engaging document. You have put forward cogent arguments on both sides, be it the app’s possible benefits or feasibility shortcomings. You have kept an impartial tone throughout this document, allowing the reader to make up their own mind as to the best course of action. In that, you have achieved the core purpose of writing a formal report proposal – to propose something, while seeing it from opposing perspectives and remaining objective about it.

Well done, Karolina! This is tremendous work and I hope your revised version continues along this trajectory! Kind regards, Liam Plosker. If you have any feedback, let me know.