Layton Peer Evaluation
1. Who do you feel is the target audience for the writing in this document? Suggest a change if you think the writing is not appropriate for this audience.
I feel that the target audience for the writing in this document may include people looking for internships in the energy realm. The information presented so far seems to be appropriate for this audience.
2. Is the information presented easy to navigate? Can you find the necessary information easily? How would you improve the layout?
The two headings used in the layout of this document are relatively clear. However, the information in the Internship section should contain bullets with complete thoughts. Some of the thoughts in the existing bullets spill over to the next bullet. Using the bullet tool would improve the clarity of the document.
3. Are headings used successfully? Are enough headings used? If so, are they specific enough? Are the headings in logical order? If not, would the document be easier to follow with more headings? Level two headings? If so, suggest some headings.
The two headings currently in the document could be redesigned to improve clarity. A suggestion would be to use Project History or Project Background Instead of The Project. Additional heading may include: (1) Duties of the intern; (2) Requirements; and (3) References.
4. Is there a clear topic sentence for each paragraph? Do all following sentences relate to that topic sentence? How could topic sentences of the paragraphs be improved? Suggest improvements for specific paragraphs.
The topic sentence should be honed and paragraphs developed upon the topic. Examples may include: “The HEIF program was established to…”, and ”The role of the intern is diverse.”
5. Is the writing objective? Remember this is a technical communication. Make suggestions to avoid bias or opinion in sentences. (For example: eliminate adjectives/adverbs: very, many, large, etc)
I do not detect over powering bias in the writing that has been presented so far in the document.
6. Is each figure or photograph easy to understand? How could the figures be improved? Can you suggest another figure presents the information in a clearer manner?
No figures or photos are present in the document at this time. A suggestion for a photo may include pie chart describing the duties of the intern and the estimated time spent performing each task.
7. Does the writer refer to the figure(s) in the text using figure numbers? Is each figure well described in the text and are the sources cited? Do the figures have captions? Make suggestions to better incorporate figures.
No references are made to figures. Incorporate a figure into the document consists of two basic steps: (1) use descriptive text to present the idea represented by the figure; and (2) including the figure into the document after the introduction.
8. If this is a RCEA page have the writers clearly presented the bottom line (predicted money and carbon dioxide emissions saved versus actual money and carbon dioxide emissions saved) in a table or graphical format? Suggest improvements to make this comparison easier for the reader to understand.
This is not an RCEA page.
9. Are there any questions you have about the topic that are not addressed? Are the sources of the information clearly presented under “References”?
What does HEIF stand for? When was the project started? Has it been successful? The document does not include a reference section.
10. Does the author provide links to related sites? Are there enough or too many? Are they technical enough or too technical for the audience of the document? Is the relevance of each site clear? Is there a summary of references?
The document does not contain links to relative sites.
11. Is the document too long or short? (It should be between 2-3 pages). If it is too long, what should be taken out? If it is too short what remains to be addressed?
At this point the document is too short. Topics to be addressed may include: (1) How are baselines established?; (2) How are candidate building identified and evaluated?; (3) What do HEIF proposals consist of?: (4) What are some examples of past outreach programs?; and (5) How is the HSU community educated about efficiency?
12. Does the page have the “ENGR 115: In Progress” banner? Does the page have the correct categories (ENGR 115 and RCEA if applicable) at the end of page?
The document includes the progress banner at the top of the page. The document contains the correct Engineering categories at the bottom of the page.
13. List the strengths of document - (Be sure to address how the Appropedia page looks at this time.)
The font used for the headings seems to distinguish them well. The topics listed in the internship section look appropriate and have definite room to expand on. Some interesting history of the records filing system is briefly discussed and may an interesting example of the increase in information sharing.
14. List areas for improvement – (Be sure to address how the Appropedia page looks at this time.)
The addition of some figures and links will improve the functionality of the document. Adding descriptive titles to the future figures would add increase the usability of the document. Links to the HEIF website and to the UC Davis HEIF would also improve the functionality of the document.
15. Overall comments – (Any feedback for the authors)
The semester is quickly coming to a close. This being said, it looks like you guys should shift gears on this project and “get ‘er done.”