Leif Jack

This course has provided much room for reflection, whether in terms of my assignments and learning process, or how I can apply the skills I’ve developed in this course to my future endeavors.

One of my biggest strengths in assignments is generating ideas, and being very specific about how I define and say things. However, this frequently causes the problem where I am over detailed and need to edit my writing for conciseness. Similarly, I still need to work on tone by rewriting my sentence is so I can remove pronouns Where possible, and this will also help my concision. Concerning my learning process, I have had a lot of trouble Fundamentally changing the way I write so as to be more concise. Often, when I edit for concision, I usually just change word order slightly and remove unnecessary words. Well, this is not a wrong approach to editing, I think I could really benefit from seeing other ways to write sentences, often I feel my writing sticks to a formula I don’t entirely know how to change. However, when I do understand a new way to do things, I’m very disciplined about incorporating it as much as possible into my writing and editing accordingly.

Relating this to my future, and how this can support it, one of my strengths is a sensitivity towards tense matters. Well, I am still developing in my professional tone, I think in many assignments dealing with sensitive matters like the Evan Crisp memo or the complaint and adjustment letters, I was sufficiently diplomatic. This will serve me well in the future, as a diplomatic poorly written letter is preferred to an extremely accusatory one that is written perfectly.

In some ways creating this web folio was meditative. Having to go back and edit all our assignments from the course made me very aware of the present, as you’re not thinking about what you have to write only what now exists on the page, and then correcting it or finding a more concise way of saying it. related to that, editing all our assignments forces us two really apply the strategies and feedback we’ve received during this course.

Creating this web folio was also interesting from a design and marketing perspective. One of the most important questions I asked was how to organize the vast amount of material required to be on our site. Larger scale sections were straight forward to organize, for example it was clear that the bio page could just be one page, and it did not require any other subpages. Where it was tricky was specifically with the resume, application package, and portfolio pages. Were the application package and resume distinct items that should each receive their own page? Or should one or should they be under what one tab called “Work” and each be a subpage. I eventually settled that they should be under the same page because they contain similar documents and ideas. the portfolio is trickiest, because you can argue that writing samples should be in the same area as a resume and application package. Because the portfolio required uploading at least nine edited documents, I felt the sub menu would be too cluttered if you also added a resume and applications package. Thus. To reduce the size of the sub menu I kept the portfolio as a separate tab from the resume and application package.

Figuring out how to market my site was also an interesting challenge. I had to ask myself which organisations would be interested in someone with a resume and writing portfolio, but also a passion for music and plenty of experience in that area. After some consideration, I decided all the content on my website would be most relevant to arts organisations looking for someone who could create effective technical documents, perhaps an administrative assistant or projects management assistant. Using an arts organization as my audience, I was able to unify both my assignments from the course and the bio I had already written for the blog site. This also justified including my Instagram on my page

Drafting our formal reports was a surprising process. While the report’s tone and intended audience required some formality, I was surprised at multiple points at how simple creating the report could be. These realizations occurred during my research, writing, and peer reviewing.

Concerning my research, sources providing relevant information can come from unexpected, but still credible places. Instead of more generic study that discussed climate projections and history for Kelowna in a global context, my cited climate projections came from a study about how climate projections could effect Kelowna’s wine industry. Climate change’s effects on Kelowna’s wine industry feel absurdly out of scope for my report on how to manage Mission Creek’s water levels, but the common point was the study’s climate projections, which I was using to draw conclusions relevant to my report.

Perhaps the biggest learning from this is to not dismiss a possible source because it does not cover the exact same questions you do. As an undergraduate, a source covering a very similar topic can be ideal, as it gives your claims authority and shows your knowledge of the literature. But as you create more original research beyond your undergraduate, you will draw from unexpected places by necessity, so it was interesting to a taste of that for this project.

I had a similar unexpected experience drafting my report, especially when I was discussing my survey data. Before I started, I thought this section would be a laborious and taxing process. It may have been if I had more expertise in data analysis, but I found describing the data surprisingly straightforward and slightly entertaining. I did not need to make highly technical assessments like what the standard deviation or Z-score was. It was effective enough to describe the data and make small remarks like “75% answered this way, overwhelming more than the previous answer.” Giving that context, I then only had to interpret my reported findings in my interpretation section. From this, I would say that a data section of a report is not as scary as I thought it was, and can be more relaxed In the future when preparing for it.

Lastly, reviewing my peer’s work made me realize how simple our proposals for the report could be. While I am investigating a semi-complex topic, involving climate projections, construction costs and public perception, my colleague was examining how feasible it would be for an ice cream shop to add dairy-free ice cream to their offerings. I realized I tend to be highly ambitious in what I want to cover, so what I should keep in mind in the future is to consider how long the report can be, and match my topic accordingly.

Formal Report

This unit has given me many intriguing realizations. The first concerns online networking. Researching online networking strategies was very interesting, because I found they parallel real-life networking. I’ve almost entirely used social media as a supplement to interacting with people I already know. For example, most people who follow me on Instagram are people I’ve met in real life. I’ve never used social media as my main source of making new connections. Having read these strategies though, I feel more confident about meeting new people via social media, because I’ve realized its like real life: I need to find groups and spaces with common interests, introduce myself via mutual connections where possible, and tell the other person what I find cool about them, or what we can each gain from collaborating.

Another area of reflection this unit has been brainstorming my formal report outline and proposal. For these assignments, I think the key point is to be diligent but not over-ambitious. In my case for example, its easy to think I will be able to research climate projections, the cost of water pumps, heightening dikes, collect and interpret survey data, and then fit all that information into 12-15 pages. However, I always find one section of a paper always take up more space than you imagined, so it’s more than likely the report’s final draft will omit a section.

The last area of reflection is the peer-review process, both reading others’ work, and suggesting edits. One thing I’ve noticed in others’ writing is when they are writing about something they are knowledgeable of, they tend to focus on technical correctness. Reviewing Konstantin’s proposal, he used the terms “nodes”, “edges”, and “graphic visualizations.” While these are likely terms with specific meanings within the realm of computers and technology, this level of technical correctness was initially confusing to me as layperson. Applying this to my own writing, it reminds me that I will often be sacrificing technical correctness for simplicity, because you want to documents to generally reach as wide an audience as possible. Likewise, reading others’ work, and getting feedback on my writing has put my it in context. I am very self conscious and constantly desire perfection in my writing. The downside of this, is I often feel if it is not perfect, then it is not good. Yet from peer review, others have noted my writing’s strengths, and crucially, have given an outside view of ways I can improve. Reading others’ work as well, I see what effective things they do, which I can incorporate into my writing. This all makes me more confident about my writing, and less self-conscious.

Konstantin’s Peer Review of Leif’s Proposal

Revised Research Proposal

The definitions assignment was very educational, and I learned much about writing, peer-review, and editing. Reflecting on writing, I often explain as much as possible about a topic, making the reader well-informed. However, since the target audience here are non-experts, this amount of detail can hinder understanding. For example, in the assignment’s original draft, I explain sonata form’s “key change” aspect, but my peer’s review noted that concept is too much detail for those just learning the concept. Similarly, if the overall concept you define has multiple important terms, providing working definitions on top of an analysis of parts is a good idea. In my case, including a working definition of what a “key change” is, might have made my first draft more effective.

Concerning my writing’s other aspects, using parentheses to introduce terms is ineffective if the reader is glancing through the text, as parentheses are not eye-catching. What catches a reader’s eye are diagrams and other visuals. My peer-reviewer noted my sonata form diagram was initially confusing, using terms like “exposition” and “development,” which are only defined later in their view. It was true I had a more extended analysis of sonata form’s parts later, and that likely caught their eye second because I bolded the font. Yet, I first mention exposition and related terms in my sentence definition, but they likely did not see those, as the terms were in parentheses. Overall, the biggest lesson is a visual with terms should be preceded by a visually-striking explanation of those terms.

Peer-review meanwhile prevents over-detailed writing, and balance desire for depth with accessibility to non-experts. Likewise, peer-reviewing others work is invaluable, as you verbalize the effective and ineffective aspects of others’ writing, and then can apply it when self-editing, perhaps incorporating visuals or more concision. People can equate professionalism and authority with complex words, but often, immediately understandable writing is best, as readers will feel equal with the author, and thus more willing to respect them.

Lastly, concerning editing, deciding what to leave out of explanations was a tough choice. It can feel you are sacrificing truth and accuracy by simplifying, but from this assignment I learned it is better to give the incomplete foundation so readers can build it up themselves later, or ask further questions from that foundation. For example, while leaving out the descriptions of key change in sonata form feels incomplete, readers will likely feel less overwhelmed, and then can ask further questions like “What am I really hearing that gives Theme 2 such a different character?”

Leif Jack Revised Definition

Madison Strasman’s Peer Review of Leif Jack’s Definitions

Dear Madison Strasman,

Dear Konstantin Mestnikov,

Dear Matilda Murray,

As requested, I have posted my writing team application letter to my website, with a copy of the letter attached to the post as a Microsoft Word file.

The application letter briefly describes my:

• background
• writing and volunteer experience
• academic achievements
• writing and work ethic strengths
• improvements goals in those areas
• learning philosophy

Please let me know if there are any issues accessing the application letter. I look forward to hearing from you.

301: Leif Jack Memorandum

Enclosure: Writing Team Application Letter

Subject: English 301 Writing Team Application

Dear colleagues,

Do you want a writing team member with well-rounded writing experience who is friendly, hard-working, and plans ahead? If so, please consider reading further. I am a third-year composition major who has written classical music, electronic music, and soundtracks for student films and video games, and I am looking to join a writing team as advertised on our course’s website.

Concerning my writing experience, I have successfully taken courses on academic writing, creative writing, music history, and analysis of plays. Because of my work ethic and ability to plan ahead in these courses, I have received Dean’s List sessional standing for the past 3 years and multiple scholarships. Outside of school, I have enjoyed volunteering as an Imagine Day Orientation Leader for 2 years, as well as participating in the UBC Game Development Club, having developed my teamwork skills during both those experiences.

Regarding my writing specifically, my strongest area is formal academic writing. However, I am looking to develop my ability to write in a plain, but professional tone, and being able to adapt my writing to my intended audience. As for my learning philosophy, I love diagrams, visual aids, and re-reading a passage until I understand it, but when I am really stuck on a topic, I like talking it over with others.

As for my general work habits, I am meticulous, and great at editing, but am working on accepting that my first drafts will be imperfect, and that I need to start somewhere if I want to make them perfect. I like starting my projects as early as possible and having goals, so when working with others, I enjoy having an assigned role and a clear project timeline.

I am excited to get working on a writing team and start collaborating on projects. If you have any questions, or feel I would fit in with your writing team, please email me at leifjack395@gmail.com.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Leif Jack

301: Leif Jack Application Letter