Last Friday in class we were supposed to bring in our digital biography assignments for some peer reviewing. Peer reviewing is a great tool when you are writing papers. Many times individuals who write papers feel that since they read it over before handing it in, then there paper is finished and they feel they will get a good grade. Many times however; we miss our own mistakes and often times feel that what we are trying to say makes senses to us but in all reality it may not make sense to our readers "audience".
Peer reviewing allows us to get an outsiders perspective on our writing. By allowing for somebody to read your works and provide feedback we are able to create much better written assignments. Peer readers can give you constructive critiscism that you as a writer can take and use to make your assignmnets much better.
Peer reviewing not only makes us better writers but we also can learn alot from other people too. You can generate ideas from others and have a good time just talking about ways to tackle your writing assignments. While I think that the peer review shop was a success and something we should continue to do in the future, I also thought that this personal narrative is very beneficial.
This narrative allowed us to get back into the swing of writing and allowed us to reflect on an issue that has played a significant role in our development. The use of technology has played a large role in our everyday lives that we sometimes take for granted; however this reflective essay allowed for us to take a step back and reflect on how important technology truly is.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I agree with Steve un the fact that when reading our own papers we tend to miss easy mistakes that someone else can see when reading. Sometimes when we proof-read our own papers we skim it instead of reading it. We also learn more when others read our paper. Some things may not make sense to other and when working in groups they can explain why something doesn't make sense and we can make the corrections. Working in groups also only works if we give each other constructive criticism. Being negative to each other doesn't help, it only hurts. Therefore, the best thing about peer evaluation is giving positive feedback and constructive criticism
I agree. I reallly thought it was nice that we could all brainstorm together and compare ideas before handing in a final paper. Spellcheck doesn't always catch everything and a new set of eyes on any text is helpful.
I agree that idea generation works best in a group environment. However, in a paper with so much content driven by personal issues idea generation can be limited. However, the usefulness of the ideas can be viewed by another person and give you a better idea of what is important.
Steve, You have made great points here. Peer review is a good way to help people become critical readers.
Ruby
Post a Comment