Graphic of the Week
Ridwan Chowdhury
2nd Year Civil Engineering Undergrad
Lassonde School of Engineering, York
4700 Keele St, Toronto, ON M3J 1P3
Monday,
February 1st, 2016
TO: Dr.
Riley Beddoe, PhD, Assistant Professor
FR: Ridwan
Chowdhury, 2nd Year Civil Undergrad
RE: Letter
of Reference, Jonathan Caceres
Dear Dr. Beddoe,
It is with great
confidence that I write this letter of reference to recommend Jonathan Caceres
for a summer research position at Lassonde School of Engineering. As a valued member of my civil engineering
design team, Mr. Caceres has contributed greatly in the preliminary design
process of a water main pipeline project at Glendon Campus at York University.
His accuracy and
information retention when conducting research independently on cathodic
protection methods via anodes was highly apparent when discussing technical
information with our client this past week. His teamwork has also been much
appreciated throughout the group as he is always available when needed and can
be relied upon in completing any assigned task. He is friendly, approachable,
and allows for a positive work environment, increasing our group’s morale. He
often battles through times of low motivation, but has proactively made changes
in his attitude by becoming more goal-oriented and improve his desire to take
initiative. Recently, he has decided to take responsibility for communicating
any and all team concerns to our assigned supervisor.
Mr. Caceres has also a
wealth of real world experience after achieving a 3-year diploma in Civil
Engineering Technology from Seneca College. His most recent position as a field
technician for Bridge Check Canada, an engineering consulting company
specializing in materials engineering and construction, has added to his
repertoire of technical experience and skills. He has displayed his ability to
grasp concepts quickly when assigned responsibilities in concrete testing as
well as bridge condition surveying.
In addition to his
work and ongoing pursuit of a bachelor’s degree in Civil Engineering, he also
uses his improving organizational and time management skills to schedule volunteering
in a leadership role as a soccer coach for children under the age of 14. Mr.
Caceres has displayed exemplary qualities in his professional and student life
and I can unreservedly recommend him for a summer research position at
Lassonde. He will be an asset to any employer.
If you have any further
questions regarding Mr. Caceres’ suitability to this position please do not
hesitate to contact me at ridman@my.yorku.ca.
Sincerely,
Ridwan
Chowdhury
Ridwan Chowdhury
Marked Rubric for Reference Letter
Reflection
Context:
For assignment 2 in ENG 2003, we were required to pick a partner in tutorial and conduct a mock interview, learning as much about their skills, experiences, and qualifications as possible. We were notified about this tutorial activity beforehand so that we could prepare some questions that would help the discussion. Using the notes and information of our partner gathered, we were to write a reference letter assuming our partner was applying to a summer lab position at York.
Reflection
_______________
I posted the marked rubric for this assignment to help reflect on what I did well and what I could improve for the future. The TA mentioned that I did not specify a clear relationship with Jonathan, with whom I was writing the letter for. I thought that mentioning that he was one of my group members in a recent Design project would suffice, however, the TA advised that it is crucial to note the exact length of my relationship with him.
I am still left wondering whether as the writer of this reference letter, if it is also a part of my job to look at the job description and mention things that correlate with his skills and experiences, and tailor it as if I was tailoring a resume or cover letter for my own job applications. On the other hand, should I just be focusing on my experiences with him and selling him through my interaction with him on a personal and professional level.
Overall, I learned a great deal about the questions that go into learning about someone’s experiences and skills, and that interviewers don’t exactly have the easiest job. Nevertheless, Jonathan made it fairly easy to make him look good as he had a plethora of experiences and abilities to describe in my letter of reference. I think this is an important concept to know because as a co-op student trying to secure my first work term, I require these communication skills for interviews and writing resumes and cover letters to be able to convince the employer that my potential is worth investing in.
| Version 1: Original | Version 2: Markups/Edits Visible |
Version 3: Final
Summary/Reflection of Editing Process
During the editing process of my Civil Engineering Materials Lab 2, I used different levels of edit, which allowed me to go through my report and review it multiple times. My first round of edits I focused on sequencing and subtopic inclusions that were missing. I was missing a list of figures, list of tables, as well as Abstract so those were added in. I confirmed that the rest of the subtopics and headings were in logical order and made sense chronologically. Next, I focused on the visual aspects of my report. During this level of edit I adjusted the title page to include a signature that would confirm that this was my original work. I also added Lassonde and York University’s logo, as suggested by my civil engineering professors. I also added a lot of missing captions from figures and tables throughout the report and edited the list of figures and tables accordingly.
The next round of edits I paid close attention to writing structure, ensuring that my document flowed smoothly and each paragraph flowed from the next. At this stage I was also asking myself reflective style questions such as: “Have I put myself in my reader’s shoes?” and “Is my main point obvious?” for each section of the report. This allowed me to follow the steps in reading for credibility, reading for the reader, as well as reading for message quality and effectiveness. This next level of edit I had to take into consideration the 7 C’s: Completeness, Conciseness, Clarity, Coherence, Correctness, Courtesy, and Credibility. In terms of correctness, I had to fix my references to MLA citation format, as well as alphabetical order.
After looking at my sentence formations, paragraph coherence, and section correctness, I had to go more in detail as during the next level of edit, I had to carefully tackle grammar and punctuation. This required close attention to detail. I read it out loud to catch grammatical errors. Fortunately, there were very few grammatical and spelling mistakes. The last level of edit was an overall review of the final draft of the lab report. I checked if my table of contents matched with the corresponding page numbers, and made sure sections were visually appealing in terms of organization and spacing. The last proofreading level was just to make sure everything was finalized and completed to its best. Overall, there were many edits to be made, and I regret not going through all these levels of edit before submitting this report last semester.
The next round of edits I paid close attention to writing structure, ensuring that my document flowed smoothly and each paragraph flowed from the next. At this stage I was also asking myself reflective style questions such as: “Have I put myself in my reader’s shoes?” and “Is my main point obvious?” for each section of the report. This allowed me to follow the steps in reading for credibility, reading for the reader, as well as reading for message quality and effectiveness. This next level of edit I had to take into consideration the 7 C’s: Completeness, Conciseness, Clarity, Coherence, Correctness, Courtesy, and Credibility. In terms of correctness, I had to fix my references to MLA citation format, as well as alphabetical order.
After looking at my sentence formations, paragraph coherence, and section correctness, I had to go more in detail as during the next level of edit, I had to carefully tackle grammar and punctuation. This required close attention to detail. I read it out loud to catch grammatical errors. Fortunately, there were very few grammatical and spelling mistakes. The last level of edit was an overall review of the final draft of the lab report. I checked if my table of contents matched with the corresponding page numbers, and made sure sections were visually appealing in terms of organization and spacing. The last proofreading level was just to make sure everything was finalized and completed to its best. Overall, there were many edits to be made, and I regret not going through all these levels of edit before submitting this report last semester.