1. I feel as if I properly addressed the prompt as well as the conventions of a QRG but content-wise and because of my ill-handled time management, I am anxious and nervous. I am not sure what Sean will be looking for quite exactly as some parts of the rubric were left vague and up to interpretation. Overall, not very good.
2. A major weakness is the lack of setting and imagery, but I believe there is not much environment or senses to be appealed to in my controversy but nonetheless, I believe Sean will be looking for somewhat of a descriptive aura to the piece so I may be lacking in that front.
3. A major strength is the flow and structure of my QRG. I believe I really utilized the conventions advantageously and mastered the transitory nature of the subheadings so I am hoping that will bode well in my favor.
4. I slipped up in my time management (I promise myself I would not) overall. I have been out sick and out of town for five days but there is no one to blame but myself as I have had plenty of caution and information on the project for weeks now. I hope to improve for the next project drastically as here I am at 10:30 PM rushing to get everything in and perfecting every corner that I still can. Overall, a very enlightening and learning experience.
P.S. I do believe some of the release blog posts were unnecessary. Especially during crunch-time when I am really doing my best work under pressure I rather not be assorting verbs into a three-column. I do understand the purpose but think they should be a part of the review process rather than release. Just a thought I had and wanted to share after Sean told us to voice our opinions in class this week.
No comments:
Post a Comment