Unsplash, Laptop Hands Computer Technology, via Pixabay 2/3/2016 Public domain Distribution License
I peer reviewed Brady Thomas' draft on drones and geofencing. Here's my rubric. I mainly chose Brady's piece since, like him, I also created a Quick Reference Guide. Interestingly enough, both his and my guide looked considerably different from one another. The main thing I saw was that Brady focused more on the context of what drones were as a whole, while I talked almost entirely about the controversy without worrying too much over context (to be fair on myself, my draft was over math education, and most of everyone in the world has some sort of experience with education). Furthermore, his guide looked a lot prettier than mine. He kept his information spread out, short when possible and sweet. Mine, on the other hand sometimes wandered off onto an seemingly endless road of drivel. I feel as though I should take this information and add it to my draft; I should condense the sheer amount of information about the controversy and give some more background on the issue as a whole.
Two Things I Want to Avoid
1: I want to stop having my pieces wander off into speculation and keep itself dedicated to cold hard facts.
2: I want to avoid putting in giant blocks of texts into the guide; it makes the whole thing unappealing and uninteresting
Two Things I Want to Add
1: I want to add more visual elements; I feel as though my pictures are just thrown into the guide.
2: Similar to the first claim, I want to maybe add more meaningful links. I didn't use all of my sources from my sources blog post, so I want to integrate these if possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment