Unit 2 Reflection
This unit, we focused primarily on designing a report proposal, and working collaboratively with our team members to review and refine our proposals. We also researched some best practices for creating a Linkedin profile and tested out these methods by creating our own profiles.
Linkedin Profile
I personally found creating a Linkedin profile the most valuable part of this course so far, as it directly impacts my professional life. As I will be graduating next spring, it is helpful for me to maintain an online presence and build a professional network as I enter the “real world”. I set up my Linkedin profile at the end of high school, but for the past 4+ years, it has only said “Undergraduate student at UBC” with absolutely no other information. Upon researching and writing about best practices in my Team Forum, I felt equipped with the necessary tools to complete all sections of my profile. A particularly valuable suggestion I found in my research was to make sure to convey authenticity – even though Linkedin is a professional platform, it is still more engaging to the reader to read a profile that is clearly about an individual with their own story, rather than a generic listing of bullet points about accomplishments or tasks complete.
This lesson ties in with one of our broader course themes of always having the reader in mind when doing writing of any sort, and actively taking measures to engage the reader.
Formal Report Proposal
I am excited about pursuing my report proposal topic, which is to better incorporate food-related emissions and food sustainability considerations into UBC’s climate action commitments. The most challenging part of developing my report proposal and outline was narrowing my scope sufficiently. Initially, my idea involved approaching staff, faculty and students to collect information and insights through a mix of surveys and interviews. However, upon further consideration through reading the course text book and my peer review feedback, I realized this was too broad of a scope and wouldn’t have a focused flow. I decided instead to focus only on interviews with staff stakeholders in three key departments to inform my recommendations to improve specific high-level strategies, as enacting behavioural change from a student or faculty level is an entirely different project that is not aligned with my stated purpose. This process of recalibrating my approach allowed me to better understand my intended reader and allows for a more effective analysis.
Peer Review
As with the previous unit, I found the peer review process interesting and useful. I appreciated having a fresh perspective on my writing, as I know it can be difficult for me as the author to spot breaks in the flow (as it might be flowing well in my mind, but not translating on paper!), or even to spot grammatical mistakes, especially if I make the same error repeatedly. My team member, Kai, gave me constructive feedback that I was able to use to refine my research proposal both in terms of its focus and its written style. In turn, I provided very comprehensive feedback for Kai’s research proposal that focused on each individual section of his proposal. Coming from a different academic background, I was able to look at this technical research proposal with a new perspective, and I provided suggestions on clarifying certain terms, and rearranging certain sentences to allow for improved narrative flow. Overall, I found the peer review process to be incredibly useful, especially considering that it only takes a relatively short time commitment from the peer reviewer to provide this feedback. I will consider asking and offering peer reviews for other written work in my classes and at work as well.
I have attached my revised Report Proposal, as well as a link to my Peer Review: