Looking back at my first peer review and comparing it to my peer reviewing skills now, I can see I had a much more difficult time revising then compared to now. Looking at my comments, I can see where I was just looking to comment to meet the peer-review requirements, versus now the comments just kind of flow out and I do not have to think so much about them. I have a much easier time commenting on my peers works now because I have an easier identifying what I need to look for. On my first peer reviews, I was also looking to much for local revisions instead of global revisions. Now I do not even focus on local revisions at all until the very last part of my revision process. I have a much easier time identifying global areas that need work now, than I did when we started peer reviewing. This being said, as I have learned what to look for in my peers writing, I have been able to have a much easier time editing my own papers as well. Learning what to look for and how to revise my peers works has allowed me to do the same thing for my works. No longer do I focus so much on local edits, and instead I focus on the global edits because I am more comfortable making them. I definitely have become comfortable with Professor Gennaco’s mantra of “do not fall in love with your first draft”. I basically tear my works apart now and revise the whole structure of my papers because through our peer reviews I have gained the skills to do so. Peer-reviewing has allowed me to grow and better understand how to edit others writing and even more-so, my own writing.