Maxine Crozier is a co-op student who has been at Global Computing Corporation for three months. Maxine has noticed that her supervisor, Gary Harding, spends a great deal of time having to explain simple questions about company and intern procedure to the many interns Global hires. Gary, who has a very busy schedule, often seems frustrated at having to explain the same thing so very many times. He realizes that new interns need the information, but he is upset at spending so much time on routine information. Maxine has offered to help Gary by proposing and then writing a manual to help new interns at Global learn company procedure. Gary is enthusiastic about the idea, but he is also concerned that any document for new employees accurately reflect policy and procedure. He also know that Global hires over 17 interns every semester, and that the company needs the support these interns provide.

Overview Questions

1. Has Maxine's proposal addressed all of the problems Gary has experienced and the concerns he has raised to her?

2. Has Maxine's proposal outlined a problem she can reasonably solve within a reasonable time period? Has she indicated the resources she will need and a way to test for success?

3. Are there any areas of discussion that you think Maxine should include or delete? What are they?

4. Maxine is thinking of two audiences: Gary (her supervisor) and the readers of her manual (future interns at Global). Has she usefully described and addressed the needs of both audiences?

5. Is the order of Maxine's proposal easy to follow? What would you add to help readers follow it more easily?

6. Do you consider Maxine's writing style clear, convincing, and easy to read? What changes would you suggest? In what sections?

7. What are the greatest strengths of Maxine's proposal?

8. What are the advantages of such a proposal for Maxine? For Gary? For future students at Global?

9. What are the areas for improvement in Maxine's proposal?

1. Subject line. Does the proposal's subject line usefully and accurately address the proposal's purpose and subject?

2. Introduction. Does the introduction effectively guide the reader to the parts of the proposal relative to its purpose? (See RTI, pages 237, 253-257.)

3. Headings. Do the proposal's headings adequately describe the text that follows them and guide readers through the report? (See RTI, pages 215-218.)

4. Rationale. Does the "Need for a guide" section adequately establish a rationale for the proposed project? (See RTI, pages 537-538.)

5. Audience. What basis does the author have for the definition of audience she provides? Does the description of audience usefully address the product's outcome? (See RTI, pages 61-72.)

6. Qualifications. Is the author's discussion of her credentials convincing? (See RTI, pages 378-390.)

7. Methodology & plan. Does the "Plan for the guide" section usefully address the author's work plan and methods? (See RTI, pages 538-539.)

8. Graphics. Are Maxine's proposed diagrams sufficient for the needs of her audience as she has defined it?

9. Project outline. Is the project outline sufficiently developed to be convincing to the proposal reader? (See RTI, pages 655-656.)

10. Information sources. In what format are the bibliography entries? Would annotations of each source be helpful for the reader? (See RTI, pages 625-648.)