Tuesday, February 9, 2016

Peer Review 1

I reviewed Evan's QRG, found here. The rubric I filled out for it can be found here.

In reviewing another QRG, I learned that the entirety of the draft should be interesting for readers, which is something I definitely need to work on for my finished project. Something that I think is working well in my draft is my use of white space to make reading easier on the eyes.

I want to avoid not providing sufficient information about the stakeholders, the location and the time period, since those are necessary details to include in my post-mortem. In addition, I would like to make sure that I don't forget to include an interesting title as well as graphs and images to hold the interest of the audience.

I admire Evan's use of chronological order, as it makes things flow really well with the story. I would like to make sure that my QRG does not bounce around too much so that the order is easy to follow. Also, I appreciate his incorporation of the after effects of the controversy he talked about, and I think it would benefit my project if I incorporated something similar to wrap up the guide.

No comments:

Post a Comment