In unit one the assignment was to write a technical definition for a non-technical audience. This was a great way to begin the course and learn about writing styles and the peer review process. Below are my reflections from the definition assignment.
Writing Technical Definitions
The assignment for technical definitions in ENGL 301 was a great learning experience. I had not previously written extensive definitions, but it is a valuable skill to have gained. I was able to define a technical dental term, endodontic therapy, using parenthetical, sentence, and expanded definitions. It was challenging to write for a non-technical audience in language that was easy to understand. Avoiding dental jargon to improve readability was difficult at times. The use of parenthetical definitions through the document was a good tactic to reduce or explain other terms while writing. Using multiple expansion methods was interesting. Writing the definition with the specific methods provided guidance and direction for the assignment. After exploring the expansion methods, it was clear that unconsciously we use this method regularly in the dental field. This assignment broadened my understanding of the importance of definitions and determining your audience.
Peer Review
The process to review a team member’s definitions and receive feedback was helpful. Reviewing my team member’s assignment provided me the opportunity to see areas of improvement in my assignment. My reviewer provided areas of improvement in my work with examples, and I was able to see my definitions in a different perspective. The critiques were useful as I find it difficult to review and edit personal work without bias. I appreciated the feedback both positive and constructive. Using the provided worksheet was a great tool to review and edit both the work of others and personal work. I was able to provide feedback that was constructive such as editing for conciseness and organization. I look forward to using the peer review process on other assignments to continue to enhance my writing and editing skills.
Revisions
After the peer review, I edited according to the feedback. I was able to look for grammatical errors that were noted and important. The critique about the images was helpful and provided a different point of view than my own. Finding images for this technical term was difficult and I was unable to find improved images. This piece of criticism was crucial, so I edited the image to reduce the terms and edited my writing to include a more precise explanation. The use of jargon was also a constructive criticism. I re-read my definition and I adapted words that were too technical by adding parentheses or omitting technical words. I have learned a lot through this process and will be able to use all that I have gained from this assignment in my professional life.