This writing assignment was similar to the first critique in some aspects. Going back to do the executive summary of the paper was much like the executive summary of the first critique. It was nice, and necessary, that this assignment wasn’t confined to one page. Analyzing the piece from the first critique gave some insight into how to look at the writing samples being analyzed in the major writing assignment.
I started this assignment in mid September, and edited the document one final time last night before printing the final copy. It took some time deciding what writings I was going to analyze and include in my paper. Also, reading these documents and analyzing them took quite a bit of time.
I printed rough copies of the documents I was analyzing and annotated them as I read through them. This helped in gathering the six elements needed for the major writing assignment. I then opened a word document for each piece and wrote a page analyzing the piece without a structure. This helped me to collect my thoughts on the different writing samples. I did the interview portion and then the three writing samples. After I had completed these, I went back and did the executive summary and the conclusion. I read the paper aloud to myself three times – finding grammatical errors each read.
The job I chose to use for this assignment used a lot of the same style of writing. This made the analyzing documents somewhat challenging. The writing used in this profession is sort of a “softer” writing. This made analyzing the documents both the easiest and hardest part of the assignment. The easiest part was understanding each of the documents. However, the relaxed style used made it difficult to analyze the documents.
If I were to do this assignment again, I would chose an event planning job within the corporate world in order to get a deeper understanding of the logistics of the event coordinating world.