While writing the draft for the second writing project, I used the schema we created to guide me and keep the draft focused on being a scientific blog post rather than just an essay explaining my topic. As a team, we made sure to do our research by looking at a variety of science blogs before drafting up a schema, and I think the resulting template was solid. We made sure to give it some structure by splitting the blog post up into two main parts (background and answer) with each section having a few required parts, but we also retained a lot flexibility by having tags that could be used anywhere. Personally, I preferred using the schema we created as a small team for this project over the schema we created as a class for our last project. This might be a product of learning from any mistakes we made when creating the first schema, and making sure not repeating them for this project.
While peer reviewing my teammates composition, I noticed that the general structure was similar to mine (which was expected since we used the same schema), but we still had a few differences. The most obvious difference I saw was the structure in which we cited sources at the end of our post. While researching the structure of science blogs, we noticed that they would cite sources by either just embedding links to them when they were mentioned, or they would be formally cited at the end of the post. I chose to cite my sources more formally by using MLA format at the end, while Ben was more informal by having a paragraph at the end of the post where he discusses resources he used, and gives a brief description of what they contain and why they are relevant. This would be extremely useful to the reader if they want to learn more about a specific part of topic that was explained. Personally, I preferred his method since it seemed to fit the casual nature of a scientific blog post.
