Learning Objective

Be able to critique their own and others’ work by emphasizing global revision early in the writing process and local revision later in the process.

 

Framing Statement:

I felt the feedback I gave my classmate during this peer-review process was thorough and helpful to their revision process. As seen by my comments labeled “I” I was able to identify my peer’s main arguments and claims and offer advice on how to add to and clarifying these ideas. This is clear in comments 5 and 7. Off of these main ideas, I was able to identify evidence to support them as seen in my “E” comments. In comment 7, I challenge my peer to think how she could relate to her Alexie source more deeply to try and make her evidence strong. My other comments include “O” comments for organizational critiques such as comments 1, 8, and 9. The last category of critiques I utilized was “L” which is for local feedback. For this literary narrative, I focused on imagery to try and help me peer find places where she could expand her narrative portion of the paper as seen in comments 2 and 7. My approach to peer-review is to try and give feedback to my peer to help them globally revise their paper at the beginning of the revision process. Some example of global critiques of my peer’s work are seen in comments 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. At this point in the peer review we are focusing on global revisions first and saving local revisions for later in the process so we can make sure the paper is set up the way we want. This is why there are no specific local revisions in my peer-review of this work. This peer review shows my successful achievement of Learning Outcome 4 because it shows my ability to critique others work emphasizing global revisions at the beginning of the process. I carry these skills over when I am critiquing my own work during my process of global and local revisions.