| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Whenever you search in PBworks, Dokkio Sidebar (from the makers of PBworks) will run the same search in your Drive, Dropbox, OneDrive, Gmail, and Slack. Now you can find what you're looking for wherever it lives. Try Dokkio Sidebar for free.

View
 

HSSE report feedback

Page history last edited by Ashley Nivison 7 years, 7 months ago

-Jared is not your primary audience

-You can add a new section called reviewers

-No table of contents yet, but it’s easy to add that once the project  is finished. Just make sure to add it once the paper is done.

- No image on the front but it’s not required maybe just helpful

-no executive summary but like the table of contents this can be added once this is done.

 

Intro:

-editing concerns: 1. the wording is overdone, strange, and too long.

2. the sentences are very long try to break those up but using transitions.

Revision: what are the negative consequences? List those instead of just the negatives of the registration. This will lead into your alternatives section well.

-cite something about a consequence, if you can in the intro, needs to be persuade the reviewer.

-the criteria is supposed to evaluate the alternatives not the problem itself. Preview the aspects of the problem

-state what you are trying to improve about registration so you will transition into your next sections easier.

 

alternatives:

-specifically what are you doing? It’s hard to tell.

-to make your alternatives more clear, list them. Then break them down 1-2-3. List explain, list explain, etc.

-it’s hard to give feedback when this section doesn’t appear fully developed.

 

background and context:

if Jared is your audience, as previously stated, you don’t need to address him as assigning you this project, because he knows.

-we need to know the background of the topic, not the assignment. The first two sections of this area are not really relevant.

 

Criteria:

-explicitly say what your criteria is and what it is defined by the project assignment.

 

Methods:

Try condensing your information into common topics instead of listing it as “primary” “secondary.” It’s a more effective way to present your findings. It will help the reader find specific information easy and fast.

 

-is the integration section the recommendation? It seems like you don’t

-no evaluation section

 

-the results section is too image dominated. You don’t need to have a graph per every question on the survey. Try summarizing these results in a few sentences. It’ll be easier to read these conclusions instead of having to look at each graph.

comparable registration applications:
what are we getting from this section?

Summarize what you’ve found but actually compare it to WSU. Pro’s and con’s, best practices, findings from?, what does this offer to WSU?

-consider sub headings in the prototype section

-you need a second dimension of results, maybe about scheduling system practices at other universities. Credible sources? Maybe not just listing what WSU students say

-some of your conclusions seem like the most obvious answer. You can’t just say this is the problem, no one likes a problem, fix it.

 

http://fstudysuperstructure.pbworks.com/w/page/94782686/FrontPage

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.