Reflections: Drafting a Formal Report

The assignment for unit three focused on drafting the formal report and reviewing the work of a peer. The process was rewarding and challenging. My reflection on the assignment is below.

Researching

The research process was enjoyable. Researching is a personal favourite step of writing any document. The topic of mental health in dentistry was interesting to learn about and online databases provided relevant studies. The challenging part during the research was ensuring that the studies were credible and applicable. The other challenge was engaging those in the dental profession and gathering survey data. Survey responses were voluntary and did not yield as many responses as planned, limiting the generalizability of the data.

Organizing

Following the outline for the report was a useful guide during the organizational process, but revisions to the structure of the document were required. Organizing the collected data was difficult early in the process because much of the information could be used in separate subsections, creating a repetitive document. Formatting the report was technologically difficult and required learning about the capabilities of the word processing software. The process provided valuable formatting experience for future projects.

Writing

The biggest hurdle during the writing process was determining how much data to include since technical writing should be concise but not exclude important information. Writing for the reader with enough information but not too much is an area for improvement in the draft. Creating useful visuals was another technological challenge. Learning how and where to input the data while ensuring readability took time, but useful skills were gained from overcoming the challenge.

Peer Review

Reviewing my peer’s report  draft about was a lengthy yet rewarding process. The topic of the report, postural awareness techniques in a dental clinic, was interesting to learn more about especially because it relates to my career and report. Providing constructive criticism is difficult when a lot of time and effort was dedicated to the document. The feedback for my peer allowed for critical self-reflection of my own draft. Prior to receiving my review, the self-editing process started by noticing similar areas for improvement and strengths in my peer’s document that would improve conciseness and fluency in my document.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *