Jimmys Blog "Straub Reading"
a. How did this text surprise you?
It spoke about where to mark your comments and I don't think there should be a set of rules for that, I believe each peer review is a case of its own and you should make your comment wherever the writer would like you to make them. For me that is directly on the paper where the errors occurs and I double space it to allow the reviewer to write. I also like how it talked about ways to present your comments so it's easier for the writer to understand since this exercise is about helping the writer. As well as how in depth it got, for example being influenced by what you know about the writer and how you can help them even more, which has nothing to do with the paper itself.
b. Do you think the strategies in this text can help in peer review? Mention two that stuck out to you and discuss your opinion on them.
1) Being influenced by what you know about the writer plays a big part because even if it has nothing to do with the paper, how you make your comments with the specific knowledge of the writer can help them greatly, lie how it says if someone is struggling in the class you can still point out mistakes but just in a different way.
2) Second Paradox of responding. As the writer you should pick the feedback you want along as following along as they give their feedback so it's easier to understand them so you can actually apply their knowledge to your writing to improve it
c. Have you done peer review in the past? If so, has that experience been positive or negative and why?
Yes, I have done peer review in the past and for me it was a very positive experience. Whether the feedback is positive or negative it guided me in the directions of fixing thing, reinforced what positives i had in my essay, as well as giving me new ideas that I can add to improve my piece as a whole.
It spoke about where to mark your comments and I don't think there should be a set of rules for that, I believe each peer review is a case of its own and you should make your comment wherever the writer would like you to make them. For me that is directly on the paper where the errors occurs and I double space it to allow the reviewer to write. I also like how it talked about ways to present your comments so it's easier for the writer to understand since this exercise is about helping the writer. As well as how in depth it got, for example being influenced by what you know about the writer and how you can help them even more, which has nothing to do with the paper itself.
b. Do you think the strategies in this text can help in peer review? Mention two that stuck out to you and discuss your opinion on them.
1) Being influenced by what you know about the writer plays a big part because even if it has nothing to do with the paper, how you make your comments with the specific knowledge of the writer can help them greatly, lie how it says if someone is struggling in the class you can still point out mistakes but just in a different way.
2) Second Paradox of responding. As the writer you should pick the feedback you want along as following along as they give their feedback so it's easier to understand them so you can actually apply their knowledge to your writing to improve it
c. Have you done peer review in the past? If so, has that experience been positive or negative and why?
Yes, I have done peer review in the past and for me it was a very positive experience. Whether the feedback is positive or negative it guided me in the directions of fixing thing, reinforced what positives i had in my essay, as well as giving me new ideas that I can add to improve my piece as a whole.
Comments
Post a Comment