Peer Review for Marisa Kubacki

For this peer review, I made some comments for Marisa's podcast.

The name of the title and author for the project you reviewed

Marisa Kubacki, and her podcast titled, What Did One Psychologist Say To The Other?

A working hyperlink to the project you reviewed

Marisa's Podcast (and my comment)

An explanation of the peer review activity you selected for the project you reviewed

I chose to examine content for her podcast honestly so I could make sure I had enough strength in my content. (I feel like critiquing others is great experience for your own reflection).

An explanation of how you think you helped the author with your feedback (in other words, how did you help them make their work better?)

I really focused my comment on making the podcast a little more cut and dry for the listener. It is difficult to conceptualize all the aspects just from listening, and I encouraged that she be a little more blunt in telling the audience exactly what she wants them to know. I think in this case it is okay to use buzzwords like genre type and rhetorical strategy. The audience is looking for that and that is always something to keep in mind: how can you make the experience easier for the audience.


An explanation of how you incorporated something from the suggested Student’s Guide readings (or any other course materials, if you’d prefer) into your feedback

I touched a little bit on the organization of her podcast, and obviously the content as it relates to a summary. The organization was a really positive aspect of the podcast; everything flowed very well together. The content could be moved a little more to analysis and away from summary. For example, even if someone doesn't know what a TedTalk is (which is unlikely), I think it could be summed up quicker and she could move on to focusing on why it is something important to talk about for her topic.

One thing about their work that you admired or think you could learn from

What I would take away from this podcast is her outgoing personality. I suppose it really depends on what mood you are going for in this genre, whether you want to be slow and calm and really take your time (NPR-esque) or be, as she was, more loud and bubbly and entertaining (Hank/John Green-esque). Either way, she really accomplished the mood she was trying to put out.

Peer Review for Rigo Avila

I chose to take a closer look at Rigo's podcast, and provide editorial comments within the realm of form.

The name of the title and author for the project you reviewed

Rigo Avila. I could not find the title of his podcast.

A working hyperlink to the project you reviewed

Rigo's Project (and my comment).

An explanation of the peer review activity you selected for the project you reviewed

I chose to examine form for this podcast because I was intrigued as to why the project was split into two podcasts.

An explanation of how you think you helped the author with your feedback (in other words, how did you help them make their work better?)

I think that this podcast was already very easy to listen to, but it really would have put it over the top if there was more external content. This could really be of any type, too. I suggested more input from his interviewees, some music, or if not music at least some ambient sounds. This would help his final draft be just that much better because it continuously captures the listener's attention because there is always something new to listen to.

An explanation of how you incorporated something from the suggested Student’s Guide readings (or any other course materials, if you’d prefer) into your feedback

I incorporated both comments on the introduction and comments on his sources in his podcast. For the introduction, I said it was fine that he didn't have a stinger (a common but not necessary podcast convention) because, as a listener, you still understood what you were going to hear in the podcast very soon into its start. For his sources, I said he might want to expand on the amount and frequency of their use.

One thing about their work that you admired or think you could learn from

Rigo's voice was so conversational and outgoing! I think that is what, in part, made the podcast easy to listen to. It sounded like we were just joking along the whole time!

Reflection on Tech Writing in Medicine

Having completed project two, I can now reflect on my work.

1. What were some of the successes (or, things that went right) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.

I was really intimidated by having to use technology, and really rely on it working correctly to produce a project. But, to my surprise, it worked even better than I had hoped. I didn't have any trouble splicing any of my pieces together, and there were even some cases where things would coincidentally work in my favor! For example, when I was putting the voice tracks over the musical track, they actually lined up to be on beat a lot of the time! #MusicNerd

2. What were some of the challenges (or, things that went wrong) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.

Okay, my answer to this one is also technology. I feel like, especially for these blog posts, I couldn't seem to get my recordings in the correct format! Why are there so many formats?! Mp3, mp4, m4a, mov, etc. This is driving me nuts! I wish I knew how to convert everything correctly. I didn't face this problem as much in my actual project, though, which was nice. It was only at the beginning that I struggled with that.

3. How do you think next week will go, based on your experiences this week?

I am still intimidated by technology, but I am glad I got at least a little hands-on experience thus far.

4. How are you feeling about the project overall at this point?

Actually, I am really pleased with my project. I am hoping I am as clear to my audience as I think I am. That is really my only concern. Ya know, you've seen the same script a million times, so when you're recording it it makes perfect sense to you, but you don't always know how your listener is feeling. So, as a producer, I like the product, and I hope my knowledge is well conveyed to my audience.

Editorial Report

This section of content is from my overview, the piece that immediately would have followed my introduction.

Old Overview

New Overview

1. How did the content change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version?

I really just felt like I wasn't saying anything with this piece, and if I was, it was too focused on the fact that the audience was the most important. I wanted to be focused more around the genres and not so much the interviewees, and so my new content is really just the facts. In my final draft I really tried to give equal time and focus to all of the different things I compared and contrasted, whether that was the audience or the author or the structure or the appeals or the length of the document, etc.

2. How did the form change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the form is presenting the content more effectively in the re-edited version?

Besides the reorganization of my outline, the form didn't change all that much for this piece. This "paragraph" isn't a necessary convention of a podcast but I though it worked well with my script so I still used an overview after my introduction.

Editorial Report

This first editorial is for my introduction.

Old Introduction

New Introduction

1. How did the content change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version?

From my rough cut to my final draft, the podcast was honestly a new project. Like, ya know on those old MTV shows when they would give people makeovers, and on the beginning of each episode you're thinking, "man, there is just no way they can fix this one"? That was my podcast. For my content, I changed my outline form, and thus my script.

I definitely am confident that my changes were made for the better. Before, my content didn't have a direction and had too much fluff. My introduction seemed stagnant. The overhaul that I did is laid out so much cleaner. 

2. How did the form change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the form is presenting the content more effectively in the re-edited version?

I really think that all the examples we listened to in class solidified my form. I took notes and now I can pick out individual conventions of a podcast that I was previously just guessing on. I added a stinger and changed my music because I found more upbeat music on garage band than what I was anticipating using. My old introduction was just too long and I was just repeating.

Open Post to Peer Reviewers

Please excuse my lack of technological knowledge! This is my project, I hope you enjoy it, and I welcome your comments!

Rough Draft



Key information about your particular project that you would like anyone who peer reviews your draft to know

It is a bit lengthy if you listen to the whole podcast. I do not have my entire conclusion on here, but I don't imagine you would comment on my sign-off anyway.

Major issues or weaknesses in the “Rough Cut” that you’re already aware of (as well as anything you’d like to know from your editors about those weaknesses)

I am hoping I don't babble on too much. I know it's a long podcast, and I'm hoping I don't bore my audience. And also, do I convey my thoughts clearly? As a listener is it easy to grasp the ideas I am trying to get across?

Major virtues or strengths in the “Rough Cut” that you’re already aware of (as well as anything you’d like to know from your editors about those strengths)

I am pretty confident with how my external sources fit into my podcast and ease the transitions.

Reflection

1. What were some of the successes (or, things that went right) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.

I have all of my materials together ready to be spliced together, which is nice. The script writing itself went very smoothly.

2. What were some of the challenges (or, things that went wrong) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.

I can't seem to produce recordings at all/that I am happy with. Either some technical error inhibits my doing so (curse you, Garage Band!) or I am not happy with the way my voice sounds/some other pathetic insecurity.

3. How do you think next week will go, based on your experiences this week?

I know I just need to get over hearing my voice being played back to me, and I know that I will. So I am not worried about the overall compilation and polishing of my project.

4. How are you feeling about the project overall at this point?

Again, I will feel much better once I have produced recordings that I am happy with. But, I am pleased with my script and beyond stoked with the amount of material that I have from my interviewees.

Production Report 8b

-        So, let’s just get right into it then. There are really so many ‘genres’ if we’re speaking in regards to the medical field. So I will just be focusing on those which are exclusive to the field and are unlikely to be depicted in any other field. So beginning with a very broad view of the genres, we can assume two overarching categories: Publications directed for the patient and publications directed for other professionals. What I mean by publications for a patient, are just that these are short term writing projects maybe previously unconsidered as airquote publications. (Thiel speaks here) Examples of this would be written prescriptions and visit documentation. Individually, they serve not a whole lot of long term information for the progression of medicine. Now, more longer term publications, like case studies and research proposals are almost exclusively designed for this purpose.

1. How did you decide to use form to present your content in the raw material you’ve shared here? How did the conventions of your chosen genre influence your choices?

I formatted my script for this section keeping in mind that I want to keep my audience mentally interested in presenting my topic to them, thus I used more familiar and colloquial language to make a relatable sounding podcast.

2. How did the production of this raw material go? What kinds of any hiccups, challenges, successes, creative epiphanies, etc. occurred during the process?

Nothing too different from the last section I reviewed in 8a.

Production Report 8a

-       Hello my name is Katie Russell and welcome to the wonderful world that is my podcast. Maybe you’re wondering why on earth my podcast is entitled “help”, and you have very good reason to. But Im not going to tell you… yet. Well here I really want to discuss some of the logistics in professional communication specifically in the field of medicine. I realize that is an extremely broad category and so I have brought in some external sources who are actually professionals working out in the field to kind of restrict the bounds on what is covered. I still want to cover as large of a range as possible so I will be referencing in this podcast the types of publications one would see in the medical field on many different extremes: the point of view of a professor and that of a surgeon, someone who works predominantly in research and someone who works predominantly in everyday action in a practice. And really how the publications of these two outstanding doctors can be compared and contrasted.

1. How did you decide to use form to present your content in the raw material you’ve shared here? How did the conventions of your chosen genre influence your choices?

Since I am using a podcast, I wanted to make my script sound like it would naturally be from a continuing podcast series/online news report. I think I followed the conventions of a podcast well in that aspect of formatting this portion.

2. How did the production of this raw material go? What kinds of any hiccups, challenges, successes, creative epiphanies, etc. occurred during the process?

I just haven't solidified my title yet, so my introduction alludes to a title that is still in the works. The first time I tried recording this, my computer quit the program, and this, the second time, I have a horribly raspy voice from a cold I am just getting over. So, that put a damper on my 'radio presence'.

Reflection on Production Week

1. Successes of the week.

What really helped me to remain organized with my time was that the blog posts have been more clear and concise and that now the blog posts are all compiled together in one place and I can plan out my time for this week and the next. That being said I think a really big success of this week was the that there was so much room to play with my outline and production schedule it really helped me to convey what I vision my podcast to be.

2. Challenges of the week.

I feel like I am one of the most psychotic planners you will ever meet; I have two physical planners, three online planners, and a checklist that I follow religiously. But for some reason, I actually had a bit of a hard time turning out my production schedule, and I think that is due in part to the fact that I just don't plan that way. I have become so high maintenance with my calendars that I have to see my planned work, not just write it down in a list. I have since translated my production schedule to my language of planning so I hope that I have taken into account everything I need to.

3. How I think next week will go based on my experiences this week.

Honestly, I have hope that this next week will be fine as long as I do follow up with my production schedule.

4. How I am feeling about my project at this point.

I am confident with my project outline up to this point I just need to make sure that I keep my focus on the genres and the writing production and not on the interviewees and even moreso be able to portray that to my audience.

Production Schedule

For the week of production, I have a schedule so I can ensure I stay on track and also evaluate myself once I am finished.

What Is To Be Done (yay checklists!)

• Edit script to its final draft version complete with sections of external content
• Location: D5 study room y'all
• Planned Date & Time: Sunday the 6th evening and Monday the 7th afternoon
• Resources Required: Word doc and interviewee's recordings and project 2 rubric
• Date Completed: Monday the 7th
• Changes Made After Completion and Why: I've been editing and changing pretty much until I turned it in. There are always things to change, and some pieces of the script that sound good on paper don't sound good in person.
• Splice recordings of external content
• Location: D5 study room forever
• Planned Date & Time: Thursday the 10th afternoon
• Resources Required: External content and my laptop and the opinion app
• Date Completed: Thursday the 10th. 
• Changes Made After Completion and Why: None. Once I edited my interviewees I just had to find out where to fit them in once I finished my own recordings.
• Record self
• Location: My room or a quiet study room
• Planned Date & Time: Thursday the 10th afternoon
• Resources Required: My laptop and headphones
• Date Completed: Thursday the 10th. Again on Thursday the 24th.
• Changes Made After Completion and Why: My voice sounded horrible the weekend going into spring break because of a cough I had. I also ended up changing my script quite a bit.
• Splice sequences of audio together into rough podcast format
• Location: My room or a study room
• Planned Date & Time: Thursday the 10th afternoon
• Resources Required: My laptop
• Date Completed: Saturday the 26th
• Changes Made After Completion and Why: This was the final date I ended up splicing my spoken audio together because of re-recording.
• Edit format the add audio effects
• Location: My room or a study room
• Planned Date & Time: Thursday the 10th afternoon
• Resources Required: My laptop
• Date Completed: Sunday the 27th
• Changes Made After Completion and Why: I didn't necessarily change the podcast after I finished this part, besides changing the music I was using.
• Polish
• Location: My room or a study room
• Planned Date & Time: Thursday the 10th afternoon
• Resources Required: My laptop
• Date Completed: Sunday the 27th
• Changes Made After Completion and Why: After I finished this step I was finished with the project, so I did not make changes after the completion of polishing.

I took a little bit of a different direction with my outline because I wanted to complete major things at one time, not just my intro at this time and my conclusion on a whole different day. I feel like I can flow a lot better when I devote time to solely focusing myself on production and not drawing it out over a long period of time.

Content Outline

Opening Section

• Here I will introduce myself and my topic of discussion for the podcast. I will introduce the interviewees I will be using but none of their content just yet. From what I have heard from the genre examples, the first half a minute or so of podcasts are a lot of background knowledge that inform the reader about the setting for why the podcast is taking place.
• Grabbing the Listener's Attention: I will definitely want to use some humor (although I don't know how I will specifically incorporate that) and sound effects at the very beginning to make my reader want to keep listening. I think I could also ask semi-rhetorical questions (i.e. questions that I ask now but won't be answered until later so my reader will want to keep listening). 

At Least 3 Main Body Sections

• I want my first body paragraph to be an overview of the genres used in my field. Basic explanations and minor quotes from my interviewees describing what genres are most used and their basic conventions.
• Evidence: Thiel's case study.
• Evidence: Bailey's Proposal.
• The importance and relevance of the evidence is their conventions, and moreover, the introduction of those conventions early on in the podcast. I know this might be an immediate dive into the details of publications but I want my audience to see the big picture and then zoom in on its relevance throughout my podcast by relating it to the jobs and actual work of these doctors.
• My second paragraph will dive more into the personal stories of my interviewees using these genres. This 'paragraph'/section of the podcast will be heavily interviewee-based in its content. This is where most of my external clips will be located, I envision.
• Evidence: (37 sec) Thiel talking about daily vs. long term publications
• Evidence: (14 sec) Bailey talking about origination from Australia to UA for PhD into listing of publications.
• So, following up with the importances described in the first paragraph, this evidence is doing the job of explaining more about the topics/genres/conventions but on a more down-to-earth level because of the relation to personal accounts. This evidence will be zooming in on the utilization of these genres in every day life.
• My last body paragraph will be describing the relation between the two types of jobs I encountered with my interviewees and their respective writing genres. This is where I will move forward on my intentions and opinions and also talk a little about their plans for their future writing.
• Evidence: Thiel's daily prescription writing vs. Bailey's 'takes four years' speech.
• Evidence: Bailey's hopes for the future about writing for a medical journal (followed up with both doctors naming the medical journals they know of/subscribe to).
• These pieces of evidence zoom in further on the 'personal account' part that I want to hit on, while also taking a very overarching look on the publications in relation to the whole medical field. The evidence that I am using in this section is really the words from the mouths of my interviewees. What I mean by that is that I want this section to really be about Dr. Bailey and Dr. Thiel, and not just their careers or publications.

Closing Section

• My closing section will focus in on the writing observed in my field as a whole and the relation of my observed genres to general medical writing. I want the closing section to leave my reader wanting to do more research on my topic and so I also want to use this section to talk about the influence of social media in today's medical field and if/how these genres could change.
• Larger Significance of My Subject: Since the overall significance of my topic is the place of medical publications in the broader scope of writing as a whole, I could convey this message with metaphors with descriptions in vivid imagery and accompanying sound effects and also explaining my personal vision to how these genres of publication could fit into my future plans for a career.

*Main idea(s) for each section is underlined


Additional Content:

• Author, emotional appeals, context, audience, logical appeals, purpose, credibility, biased appeals.