Reflection on Oral Presentation

           For the oral presentation, my group and I presented on the reduction of carbon emissions by private vehicles. My part was to present on the benefits, potential challenges we face with the installation of blade filter and conclusion of the whole proposal. As much as I love to talk, presentation is my weakness. When I present, I get really nervous and I tend to speak faster than my usual pace. On top of that, when I had to maintain eye contact with my peers during the oral presentation, it makes me even more nervous than I was already. Other than being nervous, I am pretty satisfied with my overall performance as I get to deliver my intentions of my slides across to the class. As for my slides’ design, I felt that it was a pale comparison as compared to some other groups who had professional and nice slideshow in my class. 
         
        Through the mock presentation and reviews done by my peers, the feedback given to me was to cut down on my hand gestures and body movements while I was presenting. Also, they told me to briefly elaborate and explain on the calculations of the proposal. I heed their advice, and on the day of the presentation, I did a brief explanation on the calculations part, but the feedback given to me by the professor was that it was too brief and not many people understand how I derive my calculations. I was a little confused since the peer review contradicts what professor has said but since the presentation was over, I shall take this as a learning point and not make the same mistake again. To sum up, I hope to improve on my language and presentation skills so I can be more professional when presenting for my next oral presentation.

Peer Review for Technical Report Writing

Peer Review for Matthew, Hui Min and Wei Tin's Technical Report.

In the benefit section, the benefits of the solution are clearly presented. The group has shown their researches and also facts on the benefits. In text citations are clearly cited as well. On top of that, there are well illustrated data and pictures, information in general, for readers to understand the technical parts of the proposal. In the evaluation section, potential challenges are well explained. The group has listed 3 different types of potential challenges and has explained each in detailed based on their research studies. Under this section, they have also come up with a solution to solve these potential challenges that they have listed down. In the research methods section, the method of research done by the group was clearly explained. There was a clear explanation on why their team has finalize the plan on retrofitting the commercial buildings in industrial park and also how the team suggested the effective placement of the solar louvers to reduce the internal heat gains as well as to maximize the absorption of sunlight.  In the concluding statement, the group has included a final summary and they also reinforce on the proposal with their reasons once again. Besides that, they also conclude with a comparison of both their product and a traditional solar panel to reinforce on their point of having the proposal. In the reference section, majority of their references are credible sources from the local government, BCA authority. The citations are all relevant. The in-text citation does not have APA style. The format of their references are wrong as well. In the visuals/graphics/charts section, all of them are used to present key concepts of the proposal and data. The group does not have irrelevant sources and all of their data presented are relevant to what they proposed. In the appendix section, their appendix are correctly formatted and titled, but in their body paragraph when stating the appendix, it was not in the correct format. To sum up, overall, I think the team did a good job in terms of language use, content and organization. 

Reviewed by Rebecca. (15 November 2016)