The written proposal had to be submitted on October 23 to Ms. Jennifer, the English course tutor. On Thursday, three days prior to the submission, we, as a group, took a look at the assessment requirements and divided the key points among ourselves so that each member would go and preform his/her part. My part was "project requirements and how your e-Magazine meets these requirements".
This is my part( the final version):
Project requirements:According to the manager, Mr Donnelly, the company is need of a new project that could revitalize the company’s business; it mustn’t cost a great deal to “develop, maintain and possibly generate income.”The main requirements can be summarised into 3 points:
- A new, creative project to revive the company’s business;
- low cost;
How the proposed e-magazine meets the project requirements:The idea of having an e-magazine itself is refreshing, productive, as well as socially engaging, thus, potentially generating more traffic for the company as the content is dynamic and frequently updated along with the site design and layout.
- Generate income.
According to Bestrank.com, WordPress is an open source content management system, meaning it is free to use (2011). Therefore, the company can focus its budget on the actual development and implementation of the e-magazine.
Because of the broadness and flexibility of the target audience, the project will be able to accommodate a wide range of advertising material in the form of ad blocks around the e-magazine; from education to sports, to student related events and tourism and so on. As a result, the e-magazine will have much potential in generating income from the varying ads.
In the end, we managed to complete what I would call a poorly compiled and unprofessional draft of our supposedly draft proposal, which was to be modified later into a final professional document and submited to Vas.
Looking back, I think all of us could have done much better regardless of whether everyone contributed equally or not. Many obvious mistakes such as the inconsistency in bullet points, duplication of a paragraph and others could have been easily avoided had we actually done a full and thorough proofread.
After realizing our mistakes from Ms. Jennifer's feedback, we fixed the errors and removed the duplicated part. My section had some subject verb agreement errors, however, it wasn't because of an under-developed English, it was simply because we didn't profread our document. Had we done that, the problem could have been easily addressed and solved.
On November 1, the final version was compiled and sent to Vas. Because there was no upload link on Moodle, we thought that one copy per group was enough just like we did for Ms. Jennifer's version of the assignment, therefore, only Dana uploaded a copy on edmodo. Later after the deadline, I emailed the rest of the group a copy of the document, and we all uploaded ours a few hours after the deadline. For next time we should make sure and ask more questions to Vas and avoid assumptions!
No comments:
Post a Comment