Group 1 - GoogleDocs, Project Three

This white paper has a good focus on the application of the web based program for Purdue’s Division of Financial Aid, but there are several areas in need of improvement. Some overall considerations would be to:

• Add the authors of the white paper on the title page
• Be consistent with the spelling of “Google Docs”
• Substitute the Google Docs logo on each page with text-related graphics/data/ charts
• Add space between paragraphs (easier to read and separate thoughts)
• Combine related sentences together to create more complete thoughts
• Provide more effective vocabulary
• Fix punctuation and grammar errors throughout

Considering the “Introduction,” it seemed that there were about three of these related headings, excluding the executive summary. I believe there should be a heading labeled “Introduction,” and if needed have sub-headings describing the history and Google Docs as a solution. For the History of Google Docs, the topic should focus on the actual Google Docs program, instead of Google, of which the audience (Purdue Financial Division) should already be familiar with. Also with the topic of “Document Creation,” I felt that the content and style of the writing can be more advanced and describe the logic of the program in a business aspect.

In the advantages and disadvantages sections, the disadvantages of Google Docs should be mentioned in greater detail and length, so even just visually, the document maintains an unbiased and in equality for the genre of a white paper. Also these two sections should relate to the needs and requirements of the Purdue Financial Division. I also think that security in both of these sections should be elaborated upon and provide specific examples. This would probably be the most significant issue related to Google Docs, since you are considering the Purdue Financial Division, sharing monetary information online is a significant subject.

Finally, the conclusion should include a summary of why Purdue Financial should/should not use Google Docs for its business plans (keep this unbiased, as a white paper should be). This paper has potential, once these issues are resolved. I liked how this team used a Table of Contents to organize the topics, and referenced sources throughout the paper for support. Good luck with the revisions!

This paper had some good content to it. The formatting was also nice and easy to follow with each section having a bold header and concise numbers. However I personally did not like all of the white space on each page. I also feel that there could be more detail in some areas. For example in the disadvantages section you say that “it is a disadvantage to know that security could be considered a concern. How is security a concern? The Summary / Discussion section also seems a little short. You could elaborate more here by summarizing all previously mentioned attributes of google docs. Also you could specify what you are talking about when you say “excess junk” or at least throw a specific example in here.
The Advantages section was a nice read. I liked that there was a lot of supportive evidence here, and that each advantage point was supported by reasons why that point would apply to everyday use. Such information is nice to have, however with the disadvantages section lacking this supporting information, I feel as though it walks a fine line of making this paper out to be more persuasive than informative. Also the last sentence of the paper states that “GoogleDocs is an obvious Editor’s choice” really sets the tone of this paper to be persuasive in favor of Google Docs, instead of leaving the decision up to the reader. I did also see a couple minor grammatical errors in the paper that you may want to take a look at. One was in the first sentence of the second paragraph of the Executive Summary. I hope my comments and suggestions help in the editing and revising of your white paper. Good luck with the remaining couple of days of class.