Reflection on Project 1 Draft

In this post I will be reflecting on comments made to my first draft of my QRG. I peer reviewed Jenny and Annelise's first drafts of their QRGs. 

Audience:

• Who will be reading my QRG, who am I trying to reach? My audience is classmates, my english professor, any students interested in the topic of embryonic stem cell research, and students who have science majors.

• What are their values and expectations, am I meeting them? My audience expects to be interested and informed by my QRG. No one in the audience wants to be bored by a long article, or confused by the content. I am revising my draft to make sure I write clearly and concisely. 

• How much information or context do I need to give my audience (without insulting their expertise)? Many students may be aware of stem cells, but lack knowledge about the details and applications in research. I will keep my background knowledge section brief, and expand on the ideas even I wasn't aware of prior to conducting the research. These ideas pertain more to the controversy like events and people speaking about the topic.

• What kind of language is suitable? Mostly formal language is appropriate because I want to come off as credible and provide knowledgeable information. Some informal language is allowed to keep the reader engaged and make the text entertaining. I will revise my diction to make sure I act upon my own suggestions. 

• What tone should I use, and should this tone be consistent throughout the draft? I should use an informative tone. I want to provide information about all sides of the controversy and not come off as biased. I have to show that I am passionate about what I'm writing about without incorporating too much emotion in my tone. This tone will be consistent throughout my draft, to keep the article organized and flow from one idea to the next. 

Context:

• What are the formatting requirements for the QRG, do I meet them? Formatting for a QRG must include a title, cited images, subheadings, short paragraphs, white space, and hyperlinks. I include all of these in my QRG. I need to improve on creating a unique design style that will follow the formatting of the QRG, but also make mine stand out. 

• What are the content requirements for the assignment, do I meet them? According to the rubric, content that must be included in the QRG includes the following: relevant background information and contextual detail, major figures involved in controversy, what genres of media these figures are commenting in, what the figures are saying along with their beliefs and values, credibility of these figures, where the controversy is going. As I re-read this list I know I can improve my QRG in some of these areas mentioned above, specifically the beliefs and values of the figures. 

• Does my draft reflect both skills gained in class and my own ideas? My draft includes evidence from research and my own analysis of the information provided. By using the PIE format, I can balance these two things. The skills gained in class also apply to formatting, and my own ideas contribute to how I personalize the design. 

• Have I addressed grammatical issues? I have addressed the grammatical critiques given my one of my peer reviews, and hope to fix more grammar issues when I get more peers to edit my draft. This is one of my weakest areas and I will need the most help with grammar. 

Branham, Lori. "Reflecting". 7 April 2010 via flickr. Creative Commons.