writing discussion
Chelsea,
I can tell that you worked hard on your paper, but there are several important ways it could have been a stronger paper.
The chief problem is that you seem to have misinterpreted the instructions as writing a general recommendation that companies should train workers. The instructions ask you to request approval for conducting research for what will end up being your WA4 report. Check the instructions and rubric carefully when you prepare assignments. A lot of the information you provide is irrelevant to satisfying the instructions and will not get credit on the rubric.
Another problem with your paper is that it contains generally good advice for any organization, but is not specific to your particular organization and its particular problems. This will also be a problem in your WA4 paper. We should have an e-mail conversation about what exactly you have in mind for WA4 because I’m afraid you’re way off track.
I see that you used information from your reading but you cite only one source within the text of your paper; listing three titles in the list of references is not enough. Citing it also helps you establish your credibility as someone who has already started to investigate the issue.
I strongly recommend using reader-friendly headings in a memo as long as yours.
In general, most of your sentences suffer from low readability, especially the overuse of the passive voice and workplace jargon (“the different assumption will be resonated so that a proper approach can be maintained on a matter pertaining the organization functionality”). Follow the advice in the assigned readings about sentence style the assignment schedule for weeks 5 and 6 and the corresponding forum topics.
Using the rubric categories, here is my feedback.
Rubric Name: WA3 -- memo to decision-maker on final report - rubric
|