Critique (3-4 pages) Using Markel\'s Measures of Excellence, critique a technica
ID: 3445344 • Letter: C
Question
Critique (3-4 pages) Using Markel's Measures of Excellence, critique a technical document or website of your choice. Briefly summarize and then analyze the document/site. Specifically, I would like you to address the following questions: Is the document clear, concise, accessible, comprehensive professional-looking, honest and accurate? Give specific examples from the text to support your critique. What are the document/site's strengths and weaknesses? You may want to format this assignment with each measure as a heading. Please submit the document or URL along with your paper.Explanation / Answer
Note: This response is in UK English, please paste the response to MS Word and you should be able to spot discrepancies easily. You may elaborate the answer based on personal views or your classwork if necessary. Since you haven’t mentioned your preference, I have picked the website “brainpickings.com”, to give the response some context and focus, I have picked one post from the site.
(Answer) Markel’s Measure of Excellence consists of 8 characteristics. Based on these attributes a document, website or communication piece may be evaluated for effectiveness. The basic purpose of this score sheet is to rate the quality of the piece and measure the effectiveness of the message.
For the purpose of the study, let us assume the website www.brainpickings.org. To add context and brevity to the score sheet, the article with the title, “The World’s Most Lyrical Footnote: Physicist Richard Feynman on the Life-Expanding Common Ground between the Scientific and the Poetic World.”
As a frequent visitor to this website and one who has signed up for the newsletter, it can be said that this is a website of the eclectic nature. There are articles on the subject of art, philosophy, science and other subjects. This would make the review far too messy and therefore, an article on Richard Feynman is discussed below.
This is an article written by one of the staff writers presumably. It is about Richard Feynman’s views on the connection between science and art. Specifically, on the connection between science and poetry.
· Honesty – Considering that this is a fairly short piece with a little bit or reporting, the parts reported seem to be fairly honest. There seem to be no lies about facts or misinformation about Feynman, Whitman or other names mentioned in the piece. Furthermore, the piece does not falsely disparage any individual. If there are any opposing views, it is merely semantics or for the sake of an educated discourse.
· Clarity – The first paragraph of the article seems a bit messy. The introduction is what needs to compel a reader to read to the end. The murky introduction takes away some clarity. Also, there are parts of the article where the author tends to digress from the subject to add points that can clearly be talked about later or as a footnote of additional information.
· Accuracy – As it goes, the pieces talked about in the article and the work of famous scientists and poets all check out. There is not inaccurate information presented in the piece.
· Comprehensiveness – The body of the article is very easy to understand is able to evoke a certain train of thought in the reader. Also, to further the understanding, every poem or piece that is talked about is hyperlinked for the curious reader to comprehend deeper.
· Accessibility – This website lacks an important feature of a simple drop-down menu. As a frequent visitor to the site, I know the drop-down menu is a few scrolls below and not in the header like it should be. A first time visitor would find it difficult to access an article about Socrates or Marie Curie if it is not a recent article.
· Conciseness – This particular piece was fairly short and succinct. There wasn’t too much pointless jabber about uninteresting subjects or unrelated topics.
· Professional Appearance – The website looks glossy and professional. There are breaks for attractive pictures and citations wherever necessary. The matter itself is well presented. There could be a few more tweaks to the website that could better the subscriber’s experience. Dropdown menus, a well-curated Instagram or Facebook page (their social media pages are uncertain and irregular). Overall, their pieces are good but the website needs to be streamlined.
· Correctness – This website seems to be written in “American.” The lines, “In looking back on the past year, I keep returning to The Universe in Verse as a singular highlight — that labor-of-love celebration of the common ground between poetry and science” work as proof. Therefore, incorrect spellings and grammatical instances like the outdated oxford comma would be a matter of relativity to which side f the pond the reader would hail from.
Related Questions
drjack9650@gmail.com
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.