1.

Assume you belong to a three- or four-person editing team that functions the way
Tara Barber’s does, as described in Figure 3.2. Each member of your team
should bring in four copies of a paper written for this course or for another one.
Exchange copies with the other members of your team so that each team member
has everyone else’s papers to review and revise. For each paper you receive,
comment on the style, organization, tone, and discussion of ideas as Wells
McCraw did in Figure 3.6.

To keep the presentation engaging for an uninterested audience , I would use techniques
like humor, personal stories, and concise slides with strong visuals . This helps capture
interest and reinforce the key points. I would also organize the information in a clear, easy-
to-follow sequence and vary my delivery with demonstrations or activities to maintain the
audience's attention. An interactive, visually appealing, and lively presentation helps
counter boredom and apathy .

When reviewing the paper I received , I noticed some wordy sentences that could be
tightened up and unclear transitions between sections . Adding transitional phrases would
improve the flow . Certain points could also benefit from more evidence or examples for
depth . Overall though, the tone is engaging and the writing style is straightforward . I
suggest polishing for clarity and concision. Please let me know if you would like me to
expand on any of my suggestions .

For my special request letter , I clearly stated my purpose and reason for needing the
information, so the reader understands how I will use it . I numbered my specific questions
to simplify responding . I provided enough time for the reader to reply and offered to share
my completed work . This makes the request reasonable and shows my appreciation for
their help

2. With the members of your collaborative team, select four different brands of the
same product (such as a software package, a Web browser, a smartphone, a wire-
less router, a Blu-Ray player, or a power tool). Each member of your team should
select one of the brands and prepare a two-page memo report for your instructor
 (see “Memos,” pages 220–227), evaluating the product according to the following
criteria:

o convenience
o performance
o technical capabilities or capacities
o reviews
o adaptability
o price
o warranties
o comparisons with competitors’ models

Each team member should then submit a draft to the other members of the team to
re- view. At a subsequent group meeting, the group should evaluate the four brands
based on the team’s drafts and then together prepare one final recommendation
report for your instructor.

Our team evaluated four brands of smartphones: the iPhone 12, Samsung Galaxy S21,
Google Pixel 5, and LG Velvet . After reviewing each other's draft memos , we met to
discuss our findings and determine which phone to recommend to our instructor .

The iPhone rated highly for performance, capabilities, and reviews . Its convenience
features like facial recognition and ecosystem integration were also appealing . However,
it was one of the most expensive options . The Galaxy had a great display and camera but
was less intuitive to use . The Pixel took excellent photos and ran the clean Android OS
but lacked some special features . Finally, the LG offered good value but was lacking in
certain areas like display quality .

After comparing all the criteria in our memos, we decided to recommend the iPhone 12 .
While expensive, it excelled across the board in critical factors like usability, speed,
camera quality, and app ecosystem . Given the focus on performance and capabilities in
the assignment criteria , we felt the iPhone's premium price was justified for a best-in-
class smartphone experience
3. Your company is planning to construct a new office, and you, together with other
employees, have been asked to serve on a committee to make sure that plans for
the new building adhere to the Americans with Disabilities Act, passed in 1990.
According to that act, it is against the law to discriminate against anyone with
dis- abilities that limit “major life activities,” such as walking, seeing, speaking,
hearing, or working.

The law is expressly designed to remove architectural and physical barriers and to
make sure that plans are modified to accommodate those protected by the law (for
example, wider hallways to accommodate wheelchairs). Other considerations
include choosing appropriate floor surfaces (reducing the danger of slipping),
placing water fountains low enough for use by individuals in wheelchairs, and
installing doors that re- quire minimal pressure to open and close.

After studying the plans for the new building, you and your team members find
several problem areas. Prepare a group-written report advising management of the
prob- lems and what must be done to correct them to comply with the law. Divide
your written work according to areas that need alteration—doors, floors, water
fountains, restroom facilities. Each team member should bring in his or her section
for the group to edit and revise. The group should then prepare the final report for
management.

Introduction

After reviewing the plans for the new office building, our committee has identified
several areas that are currently not compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) accessibility standards . In this report, we outline the changes needed regarding
parking, entryways, signage, and emergency systems to accommodate individuals with
disabilities.

Parking

The parking area does not have enough designated accessible spaces located closest to
the building entrance . Per ADA guidelines, accessible parking must meet minimum
 width and slope requirements and connect to an accessible route . We recommend adding
8 additional accessible spaces in the front lot.

Entryways

The main entryway currently includes steps leading up to the doorway . To create an
accessible route, a ramp with appropriate slope and handrails should be added . The
doorway itself is wide enough but the threshold is too high . Replace with a low-profile
threshold.

Signage

The plans lack signage marking accessible entrances and routes . Accessible parking
must be identified with signs that include the international symbol of accessibility .
Directional signs are needed to guide individuals to ramps, elevators, and other accessible
elements.

Emergency Systems

Visual fire alarms should supplement audible alarms to alert individuals with hearing
impairments. Additionally, the plans should be reviewed to ensure accessible egress in
case of emergency .

4. A new manager will be coming to your office park in the next month, and you
and five other employees have been asked to serve on a committee that will
submit a report about safety problems at your office park and what should be
done to solve them. You and your team must establish priorities and propose
guidelines that you want the new manager to put into practice. After two very
heated meetings, you realize that what you and two other employees have
considered solutions, the other half of your com- mittee regards as the problems.
Here is a rundown of the leading conflicts dividing your committee:

 Speed bumps. Half the committee likes the way they slow traffic down in the
office park, but the other half says there are too many of them and are a
menace because they damage a car’s shock absorber system.
  Sound pollution. Half your team wants Security to enforce a noise policy
prevent- ing employees from playing loud music while driving in and out of
the office park, but the other half insists that policy violates employee rights.
 van and sport utility vehicle parking. Half the committee demands that vans
and sport utility vehicles park in specially designated places because they
block the view of traffic for any vehicle parked next to them; the other
members protest saying that people who drive these vehicles will be singled
out and be given less desirable parking places.

Clearly your committee has reached a deadlock and will be unproductive as

long as those conflicts go unresolved. Based on this scenario, do the following:

a. Have each person on the committee email the other five committee
members sug- gesting a specific plan on how to proceed—how the
group can resolve their con- flicts. Prepare your email message and
send it to the other five committee members and to your instructor.
What’s your plan to get the committee moving toward writ- ing the
report to the incoming manager?
b. Assume that you have been asked to convince the other half of the
committee to accept your half’s views on the three areas of speed
bumps, noise control, and parking. Send the three opposition
committee members an attachment via email persuading them to your
way of thinking. Your message must assure them that you respect their
point of view.
c. Assume that the committee members reach a compromise after seeing
your plan put forth in part (a). Collaboratively draft a three-page
report to the new manager.

Subject: Moving Forward on Safety Report

Dear Committee Members,

 I know we have reached an impasse on some important issues related to the safety report
for the new office park manager. However, we have been tasked with submitting this
report and need to find a way to move forward productively.

I propose that we take an objective, data-driven approach to resolve these conflicts. For
the issues of speed bumps, noise pollution, and SUV parking, I suggest we gather
concrete information that allows us to make informed, evidence-based recommendations.

For speed bumps, we could survey the office park community and assess any vehicle
damage and changes in safety incidents since the bumps were installed. For noise, we
could measure decibel levels at different times and locations. For SUV parking, we could
document current availabilities of larger spaces.

By collecting measurements and feedback directly related to each issue, we can

determine reasonable solutions that both promote safety and consider employee concerns.
I believe finding this middle ground will lead to a strong report supported by the full
committee. Please share any other ideas you have on compromise and reporting
methodology. I look forward to continuing our productive discussions.

Regards,

Donald Le

5. You work for a hospital laboratory, and your lab manager, under pressure from
manage- ment to save money, insists that you and the three other medtechs switch
to a different brand of vacuum blood-drawing tubes. You and your colleagues
prefer the brand of tubes you have been using for years. Moreover, the price
difference between the two brands is small. As a group project, prepare a memo
to the business manager of the hos- pital explaining why the switch is
unnecessary, unwise, and unpopular. Focus especially on the cost difference and
its effect on the laboratory’s budget. Then prepare another collaboratively
written memo to your lab manager. Be sensitive to each reader’s needs as you
diplomatically explain the group’s position.
Dear Hospital Business Manager,

As medtechs in the hospital laboratory, we have concerns about being asked to switch
brands of blood drawing tubes to reduce costs . We want to explain why this change
seems unnecessary given the small potential savings.

The current tubes we use cost $50 per case, while the proposed tubes are $30 per case .
With our average monthly usage of 5 cases, this is a difference of just $100 per month, or
$1200 annually . Given the laboratory's annual budget is over $500,000 , these savings
are minimal.

More importantly, our techs are highly experienced with the current tubes, having used
them for years without issues . We are concerned changing brands could lead to improper
fills or sample errors as the tubes operate differently . This could actually increase costs if
tests must be re-done.

Considering the small prospective savings and risks involved, we feel keeping our trusted
tube brand is the wisest choice for now . We are happy to discuss other ideas to control
costs without affecting lab quality. Please let us know if you have any other questions.

Sincerely,

Donald Le

Memo to Lab Manager:

We appreciate you trying to reduce lab costs, but have concerns about changing tube
brands . The potential savings seem small at around $100 per month . More importantly,
our experienced techs could have issues adjusting to new tubes, risking sample errors .
While we understand the need for fiscal responsibility, keeping our proven tubes for now
seems prudent . We welcome discussing other cost-saving ideas that won't affect quality
of lab services . Please let us know your thoughts.

Regards,

Donald Le