Codes 320 Reflection 1

For my revisions, I plan to mostly focus on making our project clearer and more organized. Our research on what keeps young adults consistently involved in conservation has a lot of good information, but some parts feel too long and repetitive. I want to go back through and tighten sections so we are not saying the same thing in different ways. I also want to make sure each section connects more directly to our main research question. Another thing I want to improve is how our sources connect to our experiment design. Right now we summarize a lot of research, but I want to revise so it is more obvious how each study actually supports what we are proposing to test. I will also clean up wording and sentence flow so it reads smoother and feels more put together overall.

To strengthen our research, I think we need a few more secondary sources that focus on long term behavior change and not just awareness. A lot of what we found talks about communication campaigns and motivation, which is helpful, but I would like to add at least one more study that tracks whether people stay involved over time. Since our project is about consistent engagement, not one time action, that kind of source would help back up our claims more. I also think adding another study about college students and sustainability programs would make our argument stronger since that is our main audience group. Sources about habit building and behavior psychology could also help explain why some strategies stick and others don’t.

I am writing for my professor, classmates, and also our community partner, Heartlands Conservancy. That changes how I want to revise the paper because it needs to be both academic and practical. For the class side, it needs to clearly explain our methods, variable, and evidence. For Heartlands, it should be easy to understand and useful for real programs and events. Because of that, I want to revise so our takeaways and recommendations are clearer and more direct. I will try to keep the language straightforward and not overly technical unless it really needs to be. Thinking about both audiences helps me shape the revisions so the project is not just research heavy but also actually useful.