Unit one of ENGL 301 has, so far, been a very welcoming introduction into the world of technical communication. I have enjoyed both writing in and being part of a professional writing team where we are encouraged to give and take feedback in a respectful and encouraging tone.  For each of the assignments, I ensured that I had read the instructions and corresponding pages of the textbook before beginning to write, aligning my learning practices with my learning philosophy. The textbook provided excellent examples and blueprints for my writing which helped my acclimation to the format used in the professional field. 

For the third assignment in which we were instructed to write definitions in three different forms, I learned bona fide strategies to help expand and explain my writing. Choosing my word was easy, as were the parenthetical and sentence definitions, however, when working on the expanded definition it became clear that I needed guidance. The textbook provided clear and concise instruction in expansion and then it was up to me to use words that could be understood by an audience who lacked expertise in the field of psychology. After writing the first draft I read it trying to take the perspective of my audience catching a couple terms and points of expansion that would need further explanation to be understood. Max, who reviewed my expansion, was really helpful in pointing out areas in which I could either add or review. He pointed out areas where I may have missed certain grammatical errors and helped me try and make my work more concise for a better definition. This exercise showed me the importance of peer review before submission as there are always errors or clarification that can not be made by looking at your own work.  I will take what I learned from the instructions and the textbook and apply them to not only this class but as I enter a more professional field.

When taking the eye of the editor or reviewer it becomes clear that it can be difficult to write for a technically inexperienced audience. Esteban wrote an exceptionally good definition for a cache with clear visuals and examples in his writing. However, while reading through his definitions I found some terms that I didn’t really know the meaning of because I am not really a technological person and I am unfamiliar with the field of computer science. These are terms that Esteban may have thought that the technically inexperienced audience knew about (hardware and software) but are actually terms that need definitions themselves. When writing about a field that one is an expert in it is hard to take the perspective of and write for the inexperienced audience, which highlights why peer review from an outside source is so important. Despite these few terms I believe Esteban did an excellent job in explaining a rather abstract term that actually appears in my everyday life. I enjoyed not only learning about the writing and formatting but the other fields that my teammates are a part of.

301 “Eva Ruiz” Revised Definitions
301 “Eva Ruiz” Peer Review by Max Foran