This reflection focuses on the process of researching, organizing, and writing my formal report draft and the task of reviewing my peer.
I will admit, I found the formal report draft to be a difficult undertaking. While the format and explanations provided by Prof. Paterson and Technical Communications we very helpful, I struggled to access evidence that I believed I could use at the initial proposal stage. Social media operators often jealously guard metric data and Chief Editors dislike any analysis that might undermine their conventional approach to dissemination or pose a threat to their authority. This is only natural and I should probably have thought about this issue earlier and mentioned it in my draft’s Limitations section. Nevertheless, I was eventually able to gain access to this material as I explained how my approach would focus entirely on the data, rather than make assertions about the quality of the traditional method of publication. This explains why my draft was 2 days late. Otherwise, I found the task of organizing my work to be smooth as I was able to make good use of the format provided and I enjoyed the analysis aspect of the work.
I hope that my own peer review of Yasaman Fazel’s draft could help Yasaman has much as Jamil was able to with mine. In my review, I explained a few issues I had with Yasaman’s draft. In particular, a dearth of analysis and recommendations. The latter can be excused as I believe that, like my own issue, she was unable to get key evidence from her interviews. However, in the case of her pie chart, I explained that I fel she could do with a little extra content, despite the need for brevity. I believe that brevity shouldn’t detract from content. Organizationally, the only major issue that I could see was Yasaman’s lack of contents but, as you will see, I have explained by misgivings about this issue.
In reviewing Yasaman’s work, I learnt that it is easy to pinpoint mistakes when one is reviewing. Yet, these same mistakes make their way into my own work often. For example, grammar or typos are an issue for both Yasaman and myself. This is an area that could do with more attention, as this is the primary method of dealing with this problem. Furthermore, this project, including review and drafting, demonstrated the need for organization and flow. While the impact of a report relies heavily on evidence and analysis, organization is always required so that the reader can predict the transitions of the article and remain focused on the task.
All-in-all, I found both the reviewing and drafting to be tough but rewarding as I was able to pickup on common mistakes and gain an appreciation for the importance of organization in formal documents, such as reports.