Month: June 2017

Below is a brief reflection of my experience for Unit 2.

LinkedIn Profile:
I’m already familiar with composing a social media profile with a professional appearance, but LinkedIn proves to be a unique long-term challenge. Our recent experience has granted us a solid start on LinkedIn, but I know I need to invest more time to fully utilize LinkedIn, in addition to showcasing my skills and talent. The endorsements are also a strong feature, but will take consistency and time to develop.

Report Proposal and Outline:
Coming up with an idea to pursue was perhaps one of the more challenging parts. However, I eventually settled on my idea to explore more online UBC courses because, since this is the first time I’m taking them, I began to understand how useful they are. Both students AND professors forego commutes while having the flexibility to do the work on their own schedule? It’s a godsend, especially with the state of transit and the cost of living in Vancouver.

The scope, I find, is one of the more challenging aspects of this project, as I have to properly identify what and how to pursue the topics for this project, but within a reasonable timeframe and logistics.

Overall, progress is steady. The research phase should be underway and the rest will follow.

Peer Reviews, LinkedIn Profile
The new format allows a far better visual organization for ideas. I took advantage of this by detailing my peer report template in a way that allows standardization and customization. And such is important when taking into account the many different aspects that compose a LinkedIn profile. I used checklists for standard items (i.e. having a professional profile pic) and long comments for fine details. My feedback received here was also similar to many others – the essentials are present, but there’s more work to do long-term.

 

Peer Reviews, Formal Report Outline
The most significant aspect I’ve learned here, in both peer reviewing other’s’ work and receiving peer reviews for my own, is how every content should be tailored to the audience. In practice, reports that follow this are more persuasive and agreeable towards their audiences. I find that, while small technicalities, such as reducing wordiness, clarifying phrases, and others, are relatively miniscule if the underlying content isn’t aligned towards a clearly defined audience.

Overall:
Beyond the fundamentals of proper word structure and meaning, I find that this unit has given me more insight towards catering my written content towards a clearly defined audience. Moving on, I look forward to the next units of the course.

Attachments:

revisedAssignment2.1FormalReportProposalbyRobTrigo

Peer reviews:

LinkedIn:
http://engl301.arts.ubc.ca/2017/06/19/assignment-22-peer-review-for-linkedin-profile-2/

Formal Report Outline:

Peer Review: Formal Report Proposal for Using Visual Notes (Lani Diana)

As of now, I’ve written for various purposes. This includes academic works, books and other works for my self-publishing endeavours, written communication for business purposes, and more. I feel as if the first unit of this course has already started to enhance my endeavours for these purposes. The course has bestowed upon me a greater foresight in writing skill – such as self-awareness in writing, self-editing, and optimizing for clarity and preciseness.

INITIAL WORK:

The first few works in the unit gave me opportunities to enhance my writing skills. The emails to prospective team members was a chance to review, improve, and enhance the persuasive aspects of my writing – while also complying with the conventions of an email. The letter of application and Bio were further chances for persuasive writing, while also offering a moment to reflect on my past efforts and work, as well as my acquired skills.

 

ORIGINAL WRITING:

I chose not to do Artificial Intelligence (AI) itself because it has become a generalized term today. Instead, I chose a subtopic, the term Machine Learning, not just because of its plentifulness in current technology but also because of its narrower specialization. It has become so ubiquitous in current technology that it may be worthwhile to educate the general public about its nature.

 

PEER REVIEW PROCESS:

The opportunity to peer review one another’s’ work has always been a valuable experience. Even at this standard of written English communication, us writers are still prone to unnoticed writing errors.

Hence, additional perspectives to my work are always beneficial. This has been attested by a peer review towards my definitions. My original draft required a few minor tweaks in addition to a few rearrangements to better accommodate the flow of thought.

The opportunity to review a peer’s work was another valuable experience. I had an opportunity to improve my writing practices by inspecting a peer’s work, while also referencing technical writing standards for compliance.

For the peer review and editing process, I’ve learned that the many guidelines provided by the textbook offer a set of key rules that outline and define well-written work. I’ve used these guidelines often during both peer-reviewing others’ work and editing my work. Also, I’m starting to write more efficiently and effortlessly.

In short, this was a fruitful experience. I look forward to more opportunities to sharpen my technical writing.

Link to written Peer Review:

http://engl301.arts.ubc.ca/2017/06/05/peer-review-of-arbitrage-assignment-1-3/

Attached Definitions:

MachineLearningrevisedAssignment1.3-Definitions