Self Reflection #2

      In my technical description, I discussed the details of cupids bow and arrow. I enjoyed this assignment for the fact  that I got to choose an object that always interested me and got to come up with all of the features and attributes to it. I felt passionate as I was writing about cupid’s bow. I felt like I had really good ethos as well as pathos in writing my technical description.

      I feel as though I picked a cliche object that somehow had a really deep meaning and process behind how it works. I spent a decent amount of time trying to make sure I covered every aspect of cupid’s bow as well as his arrow and and described all of the technicalities behind it. I put in a lot of time and effort into this assignment. Personally i believe i had a left a deeper meaning behind the object alongside the technical termination of every detail on the object.

      I trust, that determined by the work I have submitted, I earned a grade of an A+. Regardless of the cliched object I renewed the item through the technical description I gave about it. I thoroughly described every single detail on the bow and arrow and somehow managed to explain it physically along with the deeper meaning behind it.

Reem Malek

                                                                                               Self- Reflection

        In my lab report, I discussed the impacts of potassium chloride (KCl) on the swimming pace of Paramecium. In this report, I could enhance the criteria of my report by making it more comprehensible for readers who are not familiar or  majoring in Biology. For this report, I had a particular group of people, the individuals who have some fundamental experience of science on the school level. In my report, I talked about certain lab methods that probably won’t be basic learning for understudies with non-science majors. If I had included more details and simpler instructions in my report it might have made it more or less beneficial. 

        While writing this lab report i felt like the most difficult thing i came across was the numbers involved. Due to the fact that i hate math and this was a biology based experiment i got super confused with the data charts and t-calculated values. If i could have done something different now, i would have did more research and asked more questions and practiced more of the math part so i can have a stronger ethos and confidence level.

        Personally, I had a great hypothesis as well as a null hypothesis, as well as my introduction. I have a good experimental design chart that I am proud of. I used accurate variables in my experimental design to portray its significance.

        I trust, that determined by the work I have submitted, I earned a grade of an A. My lab report was adequate in detail while holding it to the point. In typical lab reports, it is essential to give the important details without sentence cushioning, and I trust I have done as such effectively. I have introduced all the data expected to repeat such a test while keeping to the genuine logical technique structure. As I would see it, I would drop some points for not having other visual guides. In spite of the fact that I had tables and figures, and it isn’t important to have different pictures, the expansion of myself really doing the trial and the instruments I utilized would make it simpler for others to duplicate the experiment and not get disorganized.