I have been going through some significant difficulties during Unit Two which, although unrelated to the course, have adversely affected my ability to work effectively. As such, I have become quite behind in the formal report process, and there is much work left to be done before I will be able to proceed with the report. However, I am confident in my ability to complete the remaining work necessary to proceed in the coming days, and finish with the project on schedule.

In this post, I will address the process of creating a LinkedIn account including my thoughts on the use of social media for job searches, the peer review process for both LinkedIn and the Formal Report, and some of the trials and tribulations I’m running into regarding my formal report.

On LinkedIn

I have been “on” LinkedIn for several years now, although I had never been trained on how to use it. I use the word  “on” in quotes because I had a skeleton profile with some blank work experience and a couple interests listed before this course began. This course has allowed me to take another look at the network, and potentially find better uses for it. Doing the research for LinkedIn prior to really engaging with it made me question some of the narratives we hear about how to find work in the digital age. Post a lot, but not too much; respond promptly, but write personalized responses which slow down that process. A lot of the advice I read regarding LinkedIn was contradictory and could be boiled down to a specialized online etiquette that is difficult to understand for many people. In my own social media spheres, I rarely if ever post, and use social media like Facebook and Instagram solely for their direct messaging capabilities (and memes, to be frank). Therefore I find the world of LinkedIn to be a bit jarring, and I’m unsure if I particularly like the kind of corporate culture promoted by the network. All the same, I do think that LinkedIn presents a powerful tool that we can use to find employment, especially in an ever increasingly online environment. Shortly after making my LinkedIn account, a colleague reached out to me to connect, which is a nice feeling I suppose.

The Peer Review Process

The Peer Review process is a fundamental aspect of becoming a more effective writer, and I’ve been very lucky to have a great writing team to assist me in making my work more effective. I would like to thank them for their work, and I look forward to us continuing to work together.

Meera’s LinkedIn Peer Review:

I thought that Meera’s LinkedIn profile showcased a great example of how to use the site effectively and in accordance with the advice we gathered through our research of LinkedIn. I also think that her peer review of my own LinkedIn account accurately highlighted some of its flaws and helped me to address them.

Meera’s LinkedIn Page

Meera’s Peer Review of Zachary’s LinkedIn Page

Zachary’s LinkedIn Page

Zachary’s Peer Review of Meera’s LinkedIn Page

Sydney’s Formal Report Proposal:

I was glad to see Sydney adopt a more detailed approach to her formal report proposal. Sydney’s proposal post-edits gives the project weight and presents an interesting and relevant topic regarding the use of social media in professional environments, which dovetails nicely into our discussion about LinkedIn. Her own peer review of my proposal pointed out necessary changes which I have since amended.

Sydney’s Peer Review of Zachary’s Report Proposal

Sydney’s Report Proposal (Edited)

Zachary’s Peer Review of Sydney’s Formal Report Proposal 

Zachary’s Formal Report Proposal

The Formal Report Process

As I stated in the beginning paragraph of this reflection piece, I have become quite behind on the project (although I suppose there is a kind of cruel irony in the topic I’ve chosen for the project and the reasons for why I’ve become behind). Nonetheless, I have gone ahead with the update for the project and will subsequently have survey questions ready by the week’s end which I will disseminate to willing participants. I already know some of the challenges I’ll face, and I’ll talk about each in turn.

Finding Participants

Because the entirety of my research will be conducted online, I will need to be creative in how I find participants. One group that I’ve been thinking about is students from my recent film course which finished last month. I also want to talk to some recent graduates who were caught off guard by the sudden transition to an online learning environment while they were taking lab-based courses. I will explore other options as they appear.

Developing a Survey

This is my most immediate challenge (as it was supposed to already be uploaded). I have some ideas for the kinds of questions I want to ask, but I need to sit down and think more thoroughly about what is appropriate and achievable under the time constraints I now face.

Making it All Come Together

This is actually an area where I think I am ahead (read on schedule), because I have already been engaging with some of the literature I intend to use for the report. UBC policy is easy to access, as is policy from BCCDC, and there is so much literature regarding Covid-19 that it is often overwhelming. What will be interesting is the ways my participants will reflect on their experiences regarding the equipment they’ve needed to complete their coursework.

That’s all for this reflection piece. Overall, I am perhaps not as significantly behind as I initially thought when I set out writing this piece. With a little work I can get myself back up to speed and even pull ahead in the coming weeks.

---

Thanks again to my fellow writing team members for their solid work.

-Zach

Zachary Goldman

Dr. Erika Paterson

June 13, 2020

Subject: Unit One Reflection

 

This introductory unit for our technical writing course required us to create a set of definitions for a term we selected, to edit the definitions with the assistance of our peers, and to incorporate those edits into our original posts. My partner throughout this process was Matthew De Rose, who greatly assisted me in writing the final version of my definitions. In this post I’ll go over my own editing process related to Matthew’s work, and then dive into what I learned when Matthew reviewed my work.

I reviewed Matthew’s definition for GUI first by engaging with it piecemeal. I looked at each paragraph separately and wrote down editorial suggestions on a piece of paper. After a few readings going through each paragraph, I moved on to engaging with the document as a whole which allowed me to get a better idea of the flow for Matthew’s definition. Matthew’s writing was detail laden but concise, which made the work on my end much easier. By far my most pertinent suggestion for Matthew’s work was altering the way they engaged with the question/answer format of their expanded definition. I was glad to see that this suggestion was well received.

For my own definition, I found myself struggling to come to a conclusion regarding the level of detail I needed. In Matthew’s suggested edits, they wrote that I needed more clarity in my sentence definition, and when I went over this I realized that they were correct. I tried to alter the definition to make it clearer, but am still unsure if I succeeded in that effort. Another area they suggested I look at was where I used the negation strategy in my expanded definition. Trying to separate Ethnography from more standard travelogue writing is something that even skilled ethnographers struggle with, and I found myself arguing with myself aloud about whether or not some travelogue writing could be counted as Ethnographic.

I have always found it easier to edit other peoples’ writing instead of my own, and I want to thank Matthew for teaching me something new, and for making the work on my end more bearable by being clear and concise with their writing style. Through this process I also learned a lot about how my own writing is perceived by others, which was illuminating, and informative.

As this unit ends I feel thankful that I have good writing partners, and I think I have a good handle on where I my own writing is at, so I feel confident about going forward into Unit Two.

Yours,

Zachary Goldman

Links to work in Unit One:

Original Definition Post: Ethnography

Original Definition Post: Graphic User Interface

Peer Review of GUI Definition

Peer Review of Ethnography Definition

Final Definition Post Edits: Ethnography

 

 

To: sydney.dunn@alumni.ubc.ca

cc: meerapatel049@gmail.com

From: zdavgoldman@gmail.com

Subject: Invitation to join an ENGL 301 Writing Team

 

Hello Sydney,

We would like to formally invite you to join a writing team for ENGL 301.

We thoroughly enjoyed reading your application letter and looking through your blog more broadly. Your writing skills and history as a student representative on the Policy Review Committee are exactly the kinds of skills Meera Patel and I are looking for in our team members.

Attached to this email you’ll find both our letters of application and links to our blogs. I sincerely hope that you will consider joining our team for the remainder of the course.

Meera Patel’s Blog link

Zachary Goldman’s Blog link

Thank you for your time,

Zachary & Meera

To: Dr. Erika Paterson

From: Zachary Goldman, Technical Writing Student

Date: May 26th, 2020

Subject: Letter of Application

Below you’ll find my application letter to join a professional writing team as required by the course outline. I definitely valued the structural elements set out for us by the textbook but found myself struggling with stylistic elements, and the self-congratulatory nature of writing this type of letter.

The Letter of Application reviews my:

• Academic history at the University of British Columbia
• Work history as an Editor for The Ethnograph
• Approaches to research methodologies with at-risk populations
• Strengths as a writer and researcher

Please review the document below and offer up and critiques you may have. Constructive criticism is a vital aspect of becoming a skilled writer and greatly appreciate any feedback you may have.

Yours,

Zachary Goldman

Link Technical Writing Application Letter

Hello!

This blog is intended for my professor and fellow students in English 301: Technical Writing. Within you’ll find information about me and representations of my work for both this course and others which I have taken at UBC. All the opinions stated herein are my own and do not represent the University or any other institutional body. All photographs herein are subsequently my own unless otherwise stated.

I will be regularly updating the blog in accordance with the course outline in order to improve my technical writing skills. Posts will include projects I’m currently working on, my thoughts regrading current events, and my interests more broadly as the blog moves beyond the audience of ENGL 301.

English 301 is a course dedicated to writing techniques in a professional landscape. The major objectives of this course are outlined on the Instructor’s Blog as:

1. to introduce you through course readings and activities to the distinctive elements of writing in business, professional, and technical contexts;
2. to provide you with opportunities to practice and perfect in a series of shorter assignments and longer projects the strategies and techniques particular to writing in these contexts;
3. to engage you with your classmates in online discussion, peer review, and analysis of documents produced for business, professional, and technical contexts;
4. to direct you to the considerable resources available to you through UBC’s Career Services unit;
5. to involve you in developing and designing an online portfolio in two forms: a Linked in profile with accompanying references and a professionally designed website that also presents your resume;
6. to encourage and assist you in reflecting on your writing and developing self-editing skills.

My expectations for this course are that I meet those objectives, and that I develop the skills necessary to succeed in an increasingly online professional environment.