Author: Mitchel Sharko

Reflecting on The Creation of The Web Folio

By far, the creation of the Web Folio has been one of my favorite assignments in the English 301 course. It was seeing how all the documents came together and how the theme, fonts and layout impacted the feel of the site. Overall, I was hoping to create something as timeless as possible.  Knowing the dynamism of technology, I knew this would be no easy task.  I understand the website will need to be continuously updated however, I looked to minimize the long term upkeep. I would like to reflect on the choices I made in the overall design of this Web Folio and various documents which I included in my Best Work which helped full fill this concept.

Documents
I have included the documents which I believe portray my greatest work in the course. These can be found in the drop down menu under the Best Work tab at the top of this webpage.  I want to utilize this site as a segue into my professional life, providing a potential employer with insights to my strong writing and communication abilities.  This will differentiate me from other possible candidates.  All of the assignments have been peer reviewed, edited and demonstrate writing with a “you-attitude”. By exploring new ways of communicating with different audiences I show an employer how I am able to adapt to different environments and provides insights to my ability to work well with others.

Theme, Fonts and Layout
I was playing around with a considerable number of themes looking for something which portrays me.  I would define myself as simple yet creative and I was hoping this would be emulated in the Web Folio. I wanted to echo the concepts of freedom of the mind by illustrating this blank slate, or untouched environment. Only when you dive deeper do you see colour. The fonts are simple including grays, whites and blacks to help the photos stand out.  In constructing the layout of the Web Folio, I considered which tabs would be most important for potential employers (the target audience), requirements set by the English 301 text, and best practices mentioned in the Technical Communications text.  Importantly, those tabs critical for an employer would include my Biography and the Resume and these can be found closest to the left side of the page.

I hope you find this Web Folio is easy to read and navigate through.  Please let me know how you feel in the comment section below.  I would love to hear from you and am open to any constructive criticism you may have!

Cheers,
Mitchel Sharko

Reflecting on Me, Myself and I

By reflecting on the creation of this Web Folio I have noticed a few patterns in my writing.  I would like to discuss these as well as my strengths and weaknesses both in the learning process and the assignment components of the English 301 course.

Strengths in My Learning Process
Having worked in a professional environment, I felt I was able to quickly understand and apply the concepts portrayed through the Technical Communication text.  Knowing these professional requirements allowed me to easily mold the tone and style to confer to the audience.  As this was an online course there was a large self-directed learning component.  Demonstrating I have can apply myself without constant close supervision shows employers I don’t need to be micromanaged.  I am able to teach myself, given the right tools.  It also demonstrates I am confident and can persevere through unique challenges.

Strengths With My Assignments
Being meticulous is a strength which I clearly demonstrated in my assignments.  I maintained a high attention to detail when presenting and ensured I submitted documents with poise and deep insight.  A strong effort to read through my colleagues work translated into thorough peer reviews with valuable, constructive critiques.  I also noticed the development of my writing abilities due to the freedom I had with some of the assignments. I have never really played around with the structure of sentences before. By modifying both the content and the length I was able to change the flow of a document in hopes to further engage the reader.  From an employer’s standpoint, this demonstrates an emphasis on continually trying to learn to better myself.  This benefits me and any company as I continue to add value to the business.

Weakness in My Learning Process
One of the hardest parts of any learning process, and specifically in this class, is time-management.  In structured, traditional, classroom environments, you are required to sit down and focus on the subject.  Not having this structure creates an apparent degree of freedom.  This class, having been my first one online, has thus proven to test my level of self-motivation. Speaking honestly, there were instances where time became a factor and I had to skim over the text to ensure I delivered assignments punctually.  Especially when the assignments were due back to back.  I have learned my lesson and going forward, I will allocate my time more efficiently.

At the onset of the class there was a steep learning curve.  Having no previous knowledge on blogging or WordPress I had to allot a considerable amount of time to navigate through this new program.  I feel this impacted the quality of my writing as I had to focus more time on using the program then on actually working on writing.

Weaknesses With My Assignments
I have gone back through my peer reviews to see if there were any trends in the comments sections discussing my weaknesses.  Generally, I found there were three issues with my grammar and sentence structure:

1. I often misused plural nouns and plural possessive nouns (s and ‘s)
2. Fragmented sentences
3. Wordy sentences

Simple oversight often lead to the misuse of plural nouns and plural possessive nouns.  Fragmented sentences resulted when I tried to get to pretty with my writing.  Wordy sentences were often a sign of misalignment of thought.  Moving forward, further editing of my work with specific focus on these issues will help resolve these minor problems.

I also find there are aspects of my writing process which I am still struggling with.  I continue to jump around when completing documents.  I noticed the assignments which portrayed my best work, included those which I had created templates, or outlines, helping to control my train of thought.  I will consider continuing to integrate these as I strive to work on this weakness.

Conclusion
I feel because of the subjective nature of writing there is no way of reaching an ultimate level of perfection which caters to all audiences. Nonetheless, when writing, we can get close by leveraging our strengths and developing our weaknesses.

Reflecting on Unit 3: Development of the Formal Report Draft and Peer Review

As per my previous reflection in Unit two, I had hoped in Unit three to integrate more creativity and clarity into this section’s technical communication projects.  I also aimed to incorporate writing with a “you-attitude”. The following reflection on my Formal Report, and my Peer Review of Paul Lee’s Formal Report demonstrates my effort in incorporating these writing styles.

Researching the Formal Report
One of the main challenges I had when researching for the formal report was finding studies which specifically utilized the iClicker.  There were several American secondary sources available regarding similar products (some of them competitors to the iClicker) however, in order to minimize the number of variables I wanted to incorporate information pertaining to the product at hand (i.e. the iClicker).  Finding research on REEF Polling software was whole other ball game.  As the software is relatively new, there is limited information being offered on the effects of its use. Aside from what I have found on REEF’s company website, and information provided by universities (mainly the UBC), there is only data pertaining to similar primarily American products (this has been integrated into the Formal Report).

Research for this report is still ongoing.  I am in communication with representatives (Adam and Derek) at the UBC Centre for Teaching, Learning and Technology who have been providing me with updates to the system as they work through some of the problems (mainly bugs with the software) they have been having.  Fortunately, we have another opportunity to sit down together prior to the submission of the official report.  I hope to discuss any recommendations they may have and share my insight to help expedite the release of the software.

Organizing the Formal Report
The organization of the formal report came quite naturally thanks to the proposal and outline completed earlier.  I did have a few issues with Microsoft Word as a result of my decision to download the newest version of the program.   These issues resulted from changes to the processes required to create tables and figures.  The new version took some time getting use to, but in the long run I definitely saved time formatting the document.

Interestingly, I found myself constantly looking at the Technical Communications text (which is not necessarily a bad thing) for insight on the layout of the document.  I have completed many scientific reports however, these papers generally had specific guidelines. There was much more freedom (in terms of both the layout and criteria) with this assignment and I was uncertain on how to proceed without having a guiding hand.  I enjoyed having to flick on the creativity switch because of it.

Writing the Formal Report
This report was a huge undertaking.  As I had previously stated, the toughest part of brainstorming for the formal report was finding a subject which I could be categorically impartial. There were countless instances where I would spend time researching and writing only to find I was focusing too much on the student’s perspective, and their needs, and not considering the university’s side (UBC).  It took some time before I thought about what the iClicker meant for the University.  This device was a source of revenue and I didn’t consider how REEF Polling would impact their revenue stream. In addition, after reading my peer’s report (Paul Lee’s Formal Report:Programme Resource Center Website Survey, link can be found below), I realized my report lacked an emphasis on the reader as I had not incorporated writing with a “you-attitude”.  I had generalized the audience too a great extent (which is found often in scientific writing).  I hope to rectify this issue by modifying the introduction to sound more personable helping to connect with the reader.

Important Takeaways
I have found some resources on the UBC libraries website which I can use to help with studies on the subject at hand.  A few of these aids included physically communicating with representatives who are working to help you navigate through the endless numbers of databases.  Going forward, it will be great to utilize these assets for future research which will help me utilize time more efficiently.

I am glad to have moved away from the usual scientific reports which I have produced in the past to ones with less parameters.  Although disoriented at first, I believe this ultimately led to a more thorough report as there were seemingly less restrictions on the freedom of thought. With a scientific report you have set standards and are pressed to discuss your results effectively.  I felt with this report I was able to step out of the element allowing me to provide a more sound argument. I also must comment on the information which I found while conducting this report.  Some of the most insightful thoughts and ideas I received were sitting with individuals face-to-face, and having them talk about the products and their feelings towards them.  Although, I found it difficult at times for individuals to move past their comfort zone, listening and providing your input went a long way to finding out interviewee’s true feelings.

Peer Review
In my peer review, I was extremely impressed by the level of professionalism both in the layout and writing of my colleagues report.  The document was logically laid out and he made excellent use of his primary resources.  One of the main weakness I found was the lack of limitations.  From a reader’s perspective, I feel this created a subjective view point.  To strengthen his writing, I explained he should focus on the readers standpoint and look to see where he could be more impartial.  In addition, although he delivered attainable recommendations, I felt the lack of secondary sources weakened them.  Further research could aid in filling this gap.

The peer review for Paul Lee’s Formal Report:Programme Resource Centre Website Survey shined a light on what was missing in my own report.  I had spent a considerable amount of time researching secondary studies only to see some key results of my primary studies go unnoticed. In completion of the formal report, I will spend time ensuring I incorporate pertaining primary source information while minimizing wordiness and redundancies.

Unit three tested my patience.  There were several instances where I couldn’t find answers immediately, forcing me to change my perspective. The assignments required me to pull ideas and practices not only expressed through the Technical Communications text, and online sources, but also from previous knowledge.  I allocated a considerable amount of time writing the formal report draft and am very proud with what I had produced.  After reading my colleague’s peer review, there were a few weak areas which I overlooked, however, I am already finding ways to strengthen them.  In Unit four, the final unit of the course, we are realizing the culmination of our efforts.  I look forward to presenting the improvements I have made in my writing abilities with submission of the Formal Report, Application Package, and Web Folio.

By Mitchel Sharko

Link to Peer Review of Paul Lee’s Formal Report

English-301-Mitchel-Sharko-Peer-Review-of-Paul-Lees-Formal-Report

English 301 – Mitchel Sharko – Formal Report (Autosaved)

October 20th, 2015

Reflecting on Unit 2: Development of a LinkedIn Profile, Formal Report Proposal and Outline, Progress on the Formal Report, and Peer Reviews

As per my previous reflection regarding Unit one, I had hoped in Unit two, to integrate more creativity and clarity into my writing.  As I proceeded to complete  a LinkedIn profile, the Formal Report Proposal and Outline, Progress Report for the Formal Report and Peer Reviews I made an effort to incorporate these aspects in these technical writing assignments.

LinkedIn
I enjoyed the process of creating and designing a LinkedIn profile.  I recognize this social media tool as being instrumental in many firms hiring decisions and am pleased that this module was integrated into the course program.  Incorporating the creation of the LinkedIn profile demonstrates education isn’t limited to learning the theories, it is in the application as well.  From a professional standpoint, I believe my profile effectively describes my strengths and accurately presents the value I would add to any business.  Today’s companies aren’t just looking for a fulfilling cover letter and resume.  They want to see your ability to grasp the modern tools available for seeking employment.  These tools, which we have learned to utilize, not only allow recruiters to have a firmer understanding of you, but also give you the resources to share a more complete picture of yourself, increasing your chances of being offered a job.

Formal Report Proposal and Outline
The toughest part of brainstorming for the formal report proposal was finding a subject which I could be categorically impartial.  I searched for something which resonates with me along with many other students provided it could be explored, analyzed and improved through reasonable recommendations.  I wanted to leverage my connections in the computer science department as well.  I originally came up with the idea of implementing an iClicker app. However, after some research, I determined the technology was already in place, it just wasn’t being implemented at our school (University of British Columbia).  Which brought me to the questions why and what is preventing the integration of the technology? My formal report looks to answer these thoughts.

The proposal was critical to the development of the outline.  The outline was easy to create as the proposal already provided direction on the report, and simply acted to clarify the content.  In turn, the outline helped with the memorandum which included the progress on the Formal Report that summarized key submission dates, survey deadlines, and interview question periods.

Progress on the Formal Report
As the iClicker issue resonates with me, as well as many others, students are eager to share their input.  Progress with the report is, and hopefully will, continue to move smoothly as a result.  My largest concerns will be in compiling answers for online and face-to-face surveys and finding time during mid term season to conduct interviews.  I have created a schedule which I will follow, in order to collect as many responses as possible.

Peer Review
The peer review for Jared Kim’s proposal (link can be found below as well) brought up a few thoughts.  The majority of them revolving around transitions through sentences and paragraphs.  As I read through his proposal, it was interesting to note that at times I understood his train of thought however, there was a disconnect between the ideas as a result of a lack of transition. After reviewing and commenting on his proposal, I have since gone back to mine to see where I could make some adjustments on the same matter.

I have been surprised by the level of professionalism displayed by my colleagues. Generally, I found our team (Keyboard Commandos) to be very constructive in each others criticism with everyone providing enlightening comments. Interestingly, when your colleagues are trying to determine what they think you are trying to say, often times confusion arises because of the connotations of a word. I have stated at the beginning of this course, I have always had difficulties dealing with the subjective nature of reading and writing and I am finding that the peer reviews are helping me determine a tone which is suitable to a wide variety of audiences.

Unit two tested my technical writing abilities.  However, I believe I have made considerable gains in peer reviewing by becoming more confident with in my writing.  In Unit three, I want to integrating more creativity and clarity and look forward to other technical communication projects such as writing with the “right attitude”, continuing with the Formal Report and the development of professional editing techniques.

By Mitchel Sharko

Link to Peer Review of Jared Kim’s Proposal

Link to Revised Formal Report Proposal

English 301 – Mitchel Sharko – Revised Formal Report (Research) Proposal

September 30, 2015

Reflecting on Unit 1, the Definitions assignment and Peer Reviewing.

Unit one looked at writing, peer reviewing and editing. I found the third working assignment, defining a word for a target audience, was technically challenging as you had to develop the right mind frame.  There were three steps to the assignment.  Firstly, to take a word and define it using parenthetical, sentence, and expanded definitions, all while catering to a audience which has “no technical knowledge”.  Secondly, was to peer review a colleagues work on their definition of choice.  Thirdly, was to edit your writing after receiving feedback. Below are my thoughts on my writing techniques at each step of the assignment.

For the creation of the original draft of the definition of motherboard (edited word document attached below), my focus was on ensuring punctuality in the delivery and a writing style with a non-knowledgeable adult in mind.  I am happy to say, I was successful in submitting my work on time.  However, I didn’t complete the assignment without hiccups.  My largest issues when I was writing, was I jumped around.  After looking at the criteria I was worried that I was going to forget something or incorporate to much jargon so I found myself adding information randomly in the document.  I always have a tendency to do this.  The reasoning behind it is to ensure I hit all of the check marks to appease the graders.  This leads to very fragmented work which takes time to edit. Going forward, I want to focus on one part of the assignment, tag any relevant information, and integrate it once I approach a suitable point.  This should help with overall fluidity of the document.

As for the editing component (Jared Kim’s review of my definitions can be found here), based on the feed back I received, the general consensus of my writing was very positive.  The assignment was “clear and concise” and it was “virtually free of spelling/grammatical mistakes”.  I can attribute this to having scrutinized my writing before submitting it.  However, the comments weren’t constructive or critical which made me stop and scratch my head as I wasn’t sure what I should add.  Maybe my writing was too structured and wasn’t very original?  However, I still looked to improve my definitions and after reading a few other assignments and conducting a peer review, I realized that I hadn’t really incorporated a lot of primary resources such as peer reviewed journals. Thus, I have gone back and integrated some sentences which I believe adds a responsible amount of depth.  I didn’t want to add too much jargon into the expanded definition as this would impact the audience.

I found while peer reviewing Paul Lee’s, Definition of Anthropometry (link can also be found below) I was quite biased after creating my own document.  I compared what I had done and set it as a criteria to see what he had missed.   Thus, I approached the definition with a narrow mind, which wasn’t fair to Mr. Lee. I hope to work on this for my next peer review assignment.  While writing, I made sure I was positive and had clear constructive criticism.  I thought, “treat others the way you want to be treated”.  Having no prior knowledge of the word Anthropometry I felt Lee did a great job writing to a “non-technical audience” and this was expressed in my peer review.  Importantly, I must add that I was impressed by the clarity of the writing.  It wasn’t wordy, it had good flow.  As a result, I felt more engaged.  I hope to focus on this with future projects.  I also noticed in Paul Lee’s definition he had incorporated peer reviewed journals.  This added considerable strength to his writing and I have edited my definition to mimic this.

Unit One tested my technical writing abilities.  I have definitely learned more on peer reviewing, editing and how the connotations of a word impact the understanding of a reader.  In Unit Two I hope to integrate more creativity and clarity into my writing and look forward to other technical communication projects such as formal reports and application packages.

By Mitchel Sharko

Jared Kim’s Peer Review of Motherboard (My Definition)

Mitchel’s Peer Review of Anthropometry (Paul Lee’s Definition)

English 301 – Mitchel Sharko – Definitions of Motherboard

#12, 1975 Alma Street
Vancouver, BC V6R 3P8
September 23, 2015

English 301
University of British Columbia
Vancouver, BC

Dear English 301 Colleagues,

Please consider my application to be part of your professional writing team for the online course, English 301, at the University of British Columbia (UBC). I am currently in my second degree, studying Computer Science and Commerce. My previous degree is in Biology and Economics from the University of Alberta (U of A) in Edmonton.

My focus at the U of A was studying Microbiology and Genetics where writing a strong research paper was critical for success.  A huge component of these reports was the integration of academic articles found on online databases. What we learned was, having legitimate references was and is key for writing. I hope to utilize this instrumental asset with your team.

After studying at the U of A, I was employed with Ledcor Construction Limited working as a full time Document Control and Travel Coordinator. My professional role required me to utilize many business oriented communication channels as I was responsible for coordinating over one hundred personnel on a multi-million dollar project for Syncrude. Having strong communication skills, I was able to approach tasks outside my scope of work adding value to all parties involved while contributing greatly to a successful and profitable project.

Volunteering with programs such as the Korol Cup (hockey tournament) also strengthened my writing abilities through use of correspondences and formal letters. This program also tested my ability to work in a group settings. Freedom of expression of ideas, organization and punctuality is critical for good cohesion within a group and I integrated these ideals along with the communication techniques to help ensure a smooth running tournament.

I have learned a great deal from my experiences and hope that I can internalize and consequently apply the knowledge. Although I have many strengths in writing, my greatest weaknesses stem from the subjective nature of it. I find I always want to ensure readers can clearly understand my point which forces me to continuously go back to the sketch pad. Working together on projects I hope to implement ways, for example creating clear notes, to ensure I get my point across.

I feel with my experience and past education I bring a fresh perspective to the table. I would greatly appreciate the experience gained through working with your professional writing team.  Should you have any questions please contact me via email at mitchel.sharko@gmail.com.

Thank you for your interest,

Technical Writing 301/ Sept 2015
Mitchel Sharko

English 301 – Mitchel Sharko – Application Letter