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\u2019ve 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\u2019ve met in real life. I\u2019ve 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\u2019ve 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.<\/p>\n
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\u2019s more than likely the report\u2019s final draft will omit a section.<\/p>\n
The last area of reflection is the peer-review process, both reading others’ work, and suggesting edits. One thing I\u2019ve noticed in others’ writing is when they are writing about something they are knowledgeable of, they tend to focus on technical correctness. Reviewing Konstantin\u2019s proposal, he used the terms \u201cnodes\u201d, \u201cedges\u201d, and \u201cgraphic visualizations.\u201d 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\u2019 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\u2019s strengths, and crucially, have given an outside view of ways I can improve. Reading others\u2019 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.<\/p>\n
Konstantin’s Peer Review of Leif’s Proposal<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n